Originally posted by mistyblue:
be a man, and do the right thing. Do not take advantage of the sitaution.
That's the correct statement misty. Often, there is a chinese proverbs which states "seh4 zi4 tou2 shang1 yi4 ba3 dao1" See below for example (True Case):
2.The accused and the complainant had known one another for less than three weeks, having met on x December xxxx at the Sole Luna pub at Holland Village. The complainant who is known as ABC, was a part-time waitress there. The accused was 23 years old and was a Second Sergeant with the Singapore Armed Forces. He was smitten by her and was courting her assiduously although she was not interested in him. They had one uneventful date on xx December.
3. On xx December the accused invited the complainant to a farewell party at the Sole Luna for his friend Frankie. She accepted his invitation and arrived there at about 10.10 pm. The accused and some of his friends were there, but Frankie was at another pub, the Sultan of Swing, at Central Mall. The accused and his friends went to join F at the Sultan of Swing at about 11 pm while the complainant remained at the Sole Luna. She was still there when the accused returned from the Sultan of Swing at about midnight.
4. She had about six bourbon cokes and vodka limes and they had their effect on her. She was resting her head on the bar counter, crying. At around 2 am, the Sole LunaÂ’s closing time, the complainantÂ’s friends and colleagues were leaving the pub. The complainant was assisted by the accused and his friends on her way out of the pub. They got her into a car, but she got out, vomited and declared that she did not want to be taken home. The accusedÂ’s friends carried her into another car. They went through her hand bag and found that she stayed at ABCxxx. They also telephoned her home and informed her brother that they were sending her home. However as the complainant maintained that she did not want to go home, they took her to the accusedÂ’s home at Yxxg xn Road on his suggestion.
5. The complainant was asleep on the way there. When they reached the block where the accused stayed, she was carried to the void deck where she rested for a while as she wanted to vomit. After that she was carried to the lift, and when they reached the floor the accused resided, they stopped once more because the complainant wanted to vomit again.
The events in the apartment....
The Judge :
25. I did not accept the explanation. The accused was 23 years old. He had obtained his N level certificate as well as a Certificate on Office Skills from the Institute of Technical Education and was serving as a Second Sergeant in the Singapore Armed Forces. Having observed him, and taking into account his background, I found that it was not credible that he thought that consensual sex is sex with oral consent, and that without it, it is rape however willing the partner may be. In any event, he went beyond verbal consent in the statement, and confirmed that there was also no consent by conduct.
27. When I considered the complainantÂ’s evidence, it was clear that she had had too much to drink. She was unhappy and was crying, and did not want to be sent home because she did not want her parents to know she was drunk. She was vomiting intermittently and feeling nauseated, and even after arriving at the accusedÂ’s apartment she had to get up from the bed to go to the toilet to vomit again returning to the bed to sleep. When her sleep was interrupted by her pager, she went back to sleep after accessing her voice mail.
28. The complainant could not be in an amorous state in that condition. Her evidence that she had not consented to have sex with the accused was confirmed by the accused himself. Her calls to her friends recounting the events corroborated her evidence.
Sentence
35. In the commission of the offences, there was no violence, threat of violence, abduction or wrongful confinement. There was also no preconceived plot by the accused. He could not have known that the complainant would be drunk, or that she would not want to be sent back to her own home. The offences were committed because of his impulse to have sex with the complainant when the opportunity presented itself. The accused has no antecedents and there is no real likelihood that he would repeat the offence. On the other side of the scale, he denied the charges and went through a trial of seven days. Keeping in mind the principles set down in Chia Kim Heng Frederick v PP [1992] 1 SLR 361, I sentenced the accused to
eight yearsÂ’ imprisonment and six strokes of the cane on the first charge and eight years imprisonment on the second charge, with the custodial sentences to run concurrently in view of the proximity in time and other circumstances of the two offences.
Bottom Line: Don't let your sex temptations ruin your life. Live Upright!