President rejected Ah How's appeal against death sentence
-
didn't the people elect the majors? demoncracy?Originally posted by 0lala:i get what ur driving at
but look heres what i said,the majority of the americans are not in favour.
the execution enforced is by the mayor
-
the people elect the mayor,but it dosent mean that they will fully go along with watever the mayor does.Originally posted by sgdiehard:didn't the people elect the majors? demoncracy?
juz like the majourity elected the pap,does it mean we agree fully with their actions? -
The case is fishy. If we keep Ah Hao alive for longer, maybe we might uncover more dirt.
Anyway, one of the Court of Appeal judges thought it was more like manslaughter.
As far as I'm concerned, the Commando dunking case also involved manslaughter, but the perpetrators got off lightly.
-
US system sucks because their country ceased to be democratic since 11/09/2001.Originally posted by dragg:death sentence is necessary for violent crimes. it serves not only as a deterrent but as a form of protection to the common people.
U.S. system sucks.
they allow murderers and rapists to come out and commit crimes again. are the innocent protected from such people?
EU system so far still outshines that of US. -
i still think he was being used...
i have a feeling something is gonna be uncovered on the day of his hanging or maybe days after...
-
Even so, he will not be able to clear his name alive.Originally posted by Master -_-:i still think he was being used...
i have a feeling something is gonna be uncovered on the day of his hanging or maybe days after...
People like him in the sWAn Valley had better deals, but my neighbourhood is still alright.
-
He had been fully assessed by psychiatrists in IMH and his own defence psychiatrists and their evidences had been presented to the court. The court accepted the evidence of the IMH psychiatrists and ruled that he did not satisfy the criteria set forth for the defence of insanity or diminished responsibility.Originally posted by shirurinu:DNA evidence is of course overwhelming. Cause he is at the scene. Nobody deny the fact that ah how killed Huang Na.
But why.....................
It's like the hands who killed Huang Na is Ah how, but the mind controlling it.... is it really his own mind or others? Some of forumites feel he might just be the puppet and scapegoat. -
The dissenting judge thought that Huang Na could have died from an epileptic fit as suggested by Ah Hao. There is no medical evidence from the autopsy to support that. A simple episode of convulsion cannot be excluded from the postmortem examination either but the child had no previous medical history of epilepsy. On the other hand, there were bruises around the neck and face to suggest she died from strangulation.Originally posted by iveco:The case is fishy. If we keep Ah Hao alive for longer, maybe we might uncover more dirt.
Anyway, one of the Court of Appeal judges thought it was more like manslaughter.
As far as I'm concerned, the Commando dunking case also involved manslaughter, but the perpetrators got off lightly.
The majority decision of the judges upheld the view of the trial judge that she died from strangulation. Therefore this is murder, not manslaughter. -
My own belief is that the judge should have not allowed the evaluation to have taken place. First, it serves to undermine that the Singapore legal system as judgement is delayed. Secondly, Ah Hao seems to be responsible for his actions and clear in his thoughts throughout the proceedings. Finally, Ah Hao seems resigned to his fate.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:He had been fully assessed by psychiatrists in IMH and his own defence psychiatrists and their evidences had been presented to the court. The court accepted the evidence of the IMH psychiatrists and ruled that he did not satisfy the criteria set forth for the defence of insanity or diminished responsibility.
But as Dr Mushroom has brought up: Everyone in the Singapore Judical System has the right to be qualified for the defence of insanity or diminished responsibility.
Just my 2 cents... -
But was it WILFUL in the first place? Was her death intentional?Originally posted by oxford mushroom:The dissenting judge thought that Huang Na could have died from an epileptic fit as suggested by Ah Hao. There is no medical evidence from the autopsy to support that. A simple episode of convulsion cannot be excluded from the postmortem examination either but the child had no previous medical history of epilepsy. On the other hand, there were bruises around the neck and face to suggest she died from strangulation.
The majority decision of the judges upheld the view of the trial judge that she died from strangulation. Therefore this is murder, not manslaughter.
Compared to the Sofia Rodriguez-Urrutia-Shu case in Canning Vale, this one isn't simply open and shut. Anyway, hanging a murderer will not bring his victim back. -
That's because the dunking was unofficially accepted. COL Noah Cheah knew about the practice and he didn't stop them. The instructors were merely scapegoats.Originally posted by iveco:As far as I'm concerned, the Commando dunking case also involved manslaughter, but the perpetrators got off lightly. -
I believe that we cannot hang this man while there are unresolved issues. Sometimes, efficiency of procedure DOES NOT improve the quality of justice presented herein.
-
This is so far the first case in Singapore whereby the motive behind the entire murdering scene was not disclosed to the public. There are evidences but there is no motive. How can that be? Anyway once that fella being hanged, the case will be closed. "IF" there are really more than meets the eyes, no one will be able to find out anymore. Are our court really putting the right man on the death rope this time? I do felt sad for that little girl, but at the same time i really like to know the motive why someone would want to murder her.
-
someone mentioned that he wouldnt have come back to surrender if hes guilty. but what if hes convinced that he can use the "lame story" of being mentally disturbed to escape a harsher sentence? Living in hiding might not be easy and he probably thinks surrendering might make it seemed like hes not guilty?
I kinda think the murderer also tried to hide evidence by pretending to be more disturbed or schezophrenic than he really is.
as for the child's mom, because she is prc and get lots of money from it people will forever condemn people from china. although shes just as suspicious, and probably isnt totally innocent and really I find her profitting from her daughters death quite annoying, you do wonder if Huang Na is really her daughter and that she had raied her all these years, she would have spent just as much on the child isn't it. Was it really so much of a fair trade to have her own child brutally murdered and hope to profit from it? (there was no certainty anyway - unless she purchsed insurance)
It was more likely she milked on the profits since she cannot bring her daughter back to life anymore. Might as well make do with the best of it. -
u want to know why?Originally posted by Tosugan:This is so far the first case in Singapore whereby the motive behind the entire murdering scene was not disclosed to the public. There are evidences but there is no motive. How can that be? Anyway once that fella being hanged, the case will be closed. "IF" there are really more than meets the eyes, no one will be able to find out anymore. Are our court really putting the right man on the death rope this time? I do felt sad for that little girl, but at the same time i really like to know the motive why someone would want to murder her.
play hide and seek...ah how chiko peh molest and try to get fresh with the girl...the girl smart retaliated...chiko-peh angered hit her..she retaliate more and chiko-peh hurt her more until she half dead...die dun know how to solve prob now that if this girl live will tell the whole world she very smart. kill her wrap up dump at secluded location done.
girl mother also smart say girl very smart can be left alone while she go away. know took can be a promising child rapist and murderer so can left in her care giv the chiko-peh a chance to do her daughter.
so the stage is set the play came on and it happened. took had his fun and his crime. huang na had her death and the marler had her share of the money from kind dearted singaporeans.
police got enough evidence of the motive to murder and man who commited the murder.
took shall be punished on Earth while the marler shall be punished in Hell.
CASE CLOSED........so anymore of u wants any "Weiiiiiiiiiiiii........Wu........."? -
You cannot 'accidentally' strangle a person. From the bruises over the face and neck, Huang Na put up quite a fight.Originally posted by iveco:But was it WILFUL in the first place? Was her death intentional?
Compared to the Sofia Rodriguez-Urrutia-Shu case in Canning Vale, this one isn't simply open and shut. Anyway, hanging a murderer will not bring his victim back.
Hanging will not bring the victim back, but it satisfies the victim's family and wider society that the victim's death has been avenged. That brings closure to the victim's loved ones.
An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. If my daughter were murdered like Huang Na, I will pull the trapdoor myself. -
There are no unresolved issues. The case has been proven beyond all reasonable doubt. The forensic evidence is overwhelming. Took murdered Huang Na and deserves to die.Originally posted by LazerLordz:I believe that we cannot hang this man while there are unresolved issues. Sometimes, efficiency of procedure DOES NOT improve the quality of justice presented herein.
Actually, I think hanging is too good for child murderers. -
You could bear to do that? Won't it put you in the same league as the murderer himself?Originally posted by oxford mushroom:An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. If my daughter were murdered like Huang Na, I will pull the trapdoor myself.
Revenge is a double-edged sword. -
Jail him for life. Maybe fresh evidence will come out and he will be cleared, just like the Andrew Mallard case in Cottesloe.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:Actually, I think hanging is too good for child murderers. -
If justice was also seen to be done, why are there so many doubters out there? You cannot wish them all away.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:There are no unresolved issues. The case has been proven beyond all reasonable doubt. The forensic evidence is overwhelming. Took murdered Huang Na and deserves to die.
Actually, I think hanging is too good for child murderers.
You sound very confident and have full faith in the judgement passed, I cannot do so. however due to the lack of visible justice in my eyes that has been carried out. What has happened is a conviction passed down based on circumstantial evidence which is not solely limited to accused's actions.
Forensics show the evidence of physical harm, it does not reveal the motive nor prove beyond reasonable doubt that Took was the sole accused, or whether he was merely present. I do not know all the facts admittedly, but if we are to look into the motive of the whole case, the mother is very much suspect in her behavior and I am still of the opinion that Took must not be hanged until Huang Na's mother's innocence is proven openly in a convincing manner. -
The only time Huang Shuying can be put on the stand as a suspect and Took Leng How cleared of involvement is when AU decides to claim us as the 8th state.Originally posted by LazerLordz:If justice was also seen to be done, why are there so many doubters out there? You cannot wish them all away.
You sound very confident and have full faith in the judgement passed, I cannot do so. however due to the lack of visible justice in my eyes that has been carried out. What has happened is a conviction passed down based on circumstantial evidence which is not solely limited to accused's actions.
Forensics show the evidence of physical harm, it does not reveal the motive nor prove beyond reasonable doubt that Took was the sole accused, or whether he was merely present. I do not know all the facts admittedly, but if we are to look into the motive of the whole case, the mother is very much suspect in her behavior and I am still of the opinion that Took must not be hanged until Huang Na's mother's innocence is proven openly in a convincing manner. -
only the executioner can do that, mushroom was only rephrasing the hatred a victim's kin would feel.Originally posted by iveco:You could bear to do that? Won't it put you in the same league as the murderer himself?
Revenge is a double-edged sword. -
Never the less its never too late to execute one of the murderer first. Even if you keep Took alive can he prove that huang na's mother was aslo involved? I bet Took himeself was too blur to see that either. Anyway if we can't hang them all its better than not to hang one first.Originally posted by LazerLordz:If justice was also seen to be done, why are there so many doubters out there? You cannot wish them all away.
You sound very confident and have full faith in the judgement passed, I cannot do so. however due to the lack of visible justice in my eyes that has been carried out. What has happened is a conviction passed down based on circumstantial evidence which is not solely limited to accused's actions.
Forensics show the evidence of physical harm, it does not reveal the motive nor prove beyond reasonable doubt that Took was the sole accused, or whether he was merely present. I do not know all the facts admittedly, but if we are to look into the motive of the whole case, the mother is very much suspect in her behavior and I am still of the opinion that Took must not be hanged until Huang Na's mother's innocence is proven openly in a convincing manner. -
Something isn't right either at the Appeals Court
Here it goes by majority.. However, 1 judge had cast his doubt..
Who's going to take the responsibility if the doubt proved to be true?
-
did u ever think there would still be a review of this case once ah how is hanged? and if there was a proven evidence of doubt, do you think it will ever surface to the public once the hanging has being over? i highly doubt so.Originally posted by sbst275:Something isn't right either at the Appeals Court
Here it goes by majority.. However, 1 judge had cast his doubt..
Who's going to take the responsibility if the doubt proved to be true?