Australian are too emotional and irrational
-
News of him going to be executed have died down in Oz already, its no longer in the news.
A mare named Mykabe Diva is currently hogging the limelight. Nguyen? Who the hell is that? -
Going by the book is what the legal system in any civilised nation is meant to do. Not doing so will guarantee the following senarios:Originally posted by HENG@:the point u raised about Kingpins. That is exactly the problem with society! A drug kingpin can use a good legal defence team to get off! Why? People choose to go by and only by the book, down to the last letter. Even though say both the aussie guy and a drug kingpin ended up in court, the aussie will die while the Kingpin will live. Why? because we don't use our humanity. If we used our humanity, the Kingpin will get death! Why? because we will look into their motivations and circumstances! The aussie guy is motivated by concern for his brother. The Kingpin by Greed. Based on that alone, I think its so much clearer who should die and who should be jailed. But because we've sold our humanity, because we can only say the runner was caught with drugs while the Kingpin was caught(probably for tax evasion or for money laundering), the runner will die while the Kingpin will either get off, or continue to run his business in jail like u said. U might not have realised it, but the scenario u've tried to tack to what u think will happen if we do not sell our humanity, is actually what's happening now BECAUSE we've already sold so much of our humanity. Anyone who's humane and thinks deep will know who really deserves to die, and from there, decides who gets it.
1) There will be double standards. Two criminals with similar cases may be judged differently.
2) Judging will be biased and mistakes can be made. True criminals might be acquited while innocents convicted.
3) The credibility of the legal system will be diminished because the people will perceive that it is no longer fair.
4) Citizens will longer trust the laws to govern the nation fairly. At this point, the nation will most surely be thrust into chaos.
You've missed the point I was trying to make in my earlier post. Perhaps I wasnt clear enough.
Because the judge was not at the crime scene, there are certain cases where it will be difficult for him to say for sure who is the mastermind and who is the runner. It will be even more difficult for him to judge that are the actual motivation behind the crimes. Looking into motivations is not as simple as it may seem to you and me. In fact, judging anything that has to do with human emotions is never easy. A judge, therefore, has to use hard evidence as a guage for every case he handles.
I am not saying that the legal system in Singapore does not factor in human considerations. In other crimes, human motivations do play a role in deciding the severity of the punishment to be awarded to the criminal. Criminals have the option of using examplary behaviour in the past, the fact that they are first timers etc to appeal for a lesser sentence.
However, drug trafficking is a crime that once done, warrants the death penalty regardless of the original motivation. The trafficker may be doing it to help one sibling, but the result of his actions is the destruction of the lives of many others. He could have helped his sibling via other ways but instead had to choose a way that would harm others. -
I still advocate the removal of mandatory sentencing in capital cases.Since it is said to be in the public's interest, let the jury system be re-created for capital cases.
-
Isnt the jury system even more dangerous? Individuals untrained in legal matters could be swayed by external influences(e.g. media). Then, there would be the danger that the judgement is wrong. Lawyers in nations where there is a jury system are known to use the media to their advantage in order to win the jury over. They also employ tactics in court that appeal too much to the emotional side of the jury.Originally posted by LazerLordz:I still advocate the removal of mandatory sentencing in capital cases.Since it is said to be in the public's interest, let the jury system be re-created for capital cases. -
shrugs... maybe because sometimes there's more to meet the eye?
sometimes ppl force them, blackmail.. etc?
sometimes hanging everyone may just be solving the problem at the surface.. but not getting into the root of the problem
maybe australians understand that? and singaporeans don't -
If only our judiciary really runs by the book.Originally posted by acotis:Going by the book is what the legal system in any civilised nation is meant to do. Not doing so will guarantee the following senarios:
1) There will be double standards. Two criminals with similar cases may be judged differently.
2) Judging will be biased and mistakes can be made. True criminals might be acquited while innocents convicted.
3) The credibility of the legal system will be diminished because the people will perceive that it is no longer fair.
4) Citizens will longer trust the laws to govern the nation fairly. At this point, the nation will most surely be thrust into chaos.
The reality is, in Singapore, you're likely to be let off lightly regardless of the crime you commit (including murder) as long as you fulfil one or more of the following criteria:
1) You are an Indonesian
(just think how all the Indonesian maids who murdered their employers were spared the death penalty. Yet if you so much as lay a finger on your Indonesian maid, you're doomed); OR
2) You belong to the rich and well-connected
(Anyone remember the owner of a particular local taxi company bash up a fellow motorist who collided with his car? And how he got off with a fine only?
How about the joker who drove a Mercedes up the MRT tracks in Yio Chu Kang, endangering the lives of hundreds, and yet he was fined only $1000?
And the son of a former High Court Judge and an NMP found to be trafficking cocaine, and how he got off with such a light sentence?) -
If what you say is true, then maybe our courts arent so credible after all.Originally posted by cornyfish2000:If only our judiciary really runs by the book.
The reality is, in Singapore, you're likely to be let off lightly regardless of the crime you commit (including murder) as long as you fulfil one or more of the following criteria:
1) You are an Indonesian
(just think how all the Indonesian maids who murdered their employers were spared the death penalty. Yet if you so much as lay a finger on your Indonesian maid, you're doomed); OR
2) You belong to the rich and well-connected
(Anyone remember the owner of a particular local taxi company bash up a fellow motorist who collided with his car? And how he got off with a fine only?
How about the joker who drove a Mercedes up the MRT tracks in Yio Chu Kang, endangering the lives of hundreds, and yet he was fined only $1000?
And the son of a former High Court Judge and an NMP found to be trafficking cocaine, and how he got off with such a light sentence?)
But, just curious, did you attend the court hearings of the cases you mentioned? If so, could you provide the details of each of them please? -
Many indonesian maids being let off because defences lawyers can usually show that there is an element of mistreatment of the maids involved. Many do not even have a room of their own, not allowed to communicate with their family, no days off, no friends and often reprimanded by their employers. So it's relatively easy to prove some sort of provocation...difficult to convict on murder and the charge is usually downgraded to manslaughter if they kill their employers. If they kill another maid, it is harder to use this defence..
All over the world it is the same...rich and powerful criminals can afford expensive and better lawyers who can get them off on a point of law. Same with medicine....if you can afford better treatment and better doctors, you have a better chance of survival.
You pay peanuts, you get monkeys. -
Nope, of course i didn't attend the trials..Originally posted by acotis:If what you say is true, then maybe our courts arent so credible after all.
But, just curious, did you attend the court hearings of the cases you mentioned? If so, could you provide the details of each of them please?
But these court cases were all over the papers! Straits Times and all.
Anyway, some of these cases have even been discussed here in SGForums. Some links here:
1. The fella who drove up the MRT tracks:
http://www.sgforums.com/?action=thread_display&thread_id=82696
2. The owner of the local taxi company
http://sg.news.yahoo.com/050421/5/singapore143757.html
3. The son of the High Court judge and NMP:
http://www.paraphernalia.com/pnews_view.php?id=00000583&o=100
Please take note that according to the article below, "For consuming Class A controlled drugs like cocaine, Dinesh faced a sentence of up to 10 years' jail, a S$20,000 fine or both.
The offence carries a minimum or benchmark sentence of at least 12 months"
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/130219/1/.html
And yet in the end after appeal, he was only sentenced to 8 months jail.
4. As for the maid cases, i think everyone should by now be well aware that none of the (i think at least 5) Indonesian maids caught for killing their employers were sentenced to death. -
Latest news, he will be executed within a month from now.
-
THere are some criminal lawyers who take on pro bono cases. I really salute them.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:Many indonesian maids being let off because defences lawyers can usually show that there is an element of mistreatment of the maids involved. Many do not even have a room of their own, not allowed to communicate with their family, no days off, no friends and often reprimanded by their employers. So it's relatively easy to prove some sort of provocation...difficult to convict on murder and the charge is usually downgraded to manslaughter if they kill their employers. If they kill another maid, it is harder to use this defence..
All over the world it is the same...rich and powerful criminals can afford expensive and better lawyers who can get them off on a point of law. Same with medicine....if you can afford better treatment and better doctors, you have a better chance of survival.
You pay peanuts, you get monkeys.
Subhas Anandan ever said he was not going to charge Ah Hao's family any legal fees. Anyway, that poor guy's guilt seems rather doubtful to me. -
x2.Originally posted by iveco:THere are some criminal lawyers who take on pro bono cases. I really salute them.
Subhas Anandan ever said he was not going to charge Ah Hao's family any legal fees. Anyway, that poor guy's guilt seems rather doubtful to me. -
Oh i thought he was executed this morning.. cos their usual procedure is to carry out the sentence within 2 weeks after the President rejects the clemency plea.Originally posted by ditzy:Latest news, he will be executed within a month from now. -
If he was executed this morning, it'll be all over the australian news now.
-
poor guy
his life ends now
sad
i might rescue him if im a gurkha -
i do sympathise with him...but even if rescue him..
exile him or whatever..give some some tough punishment.
execution is a punishment that is beyond any form of living punishment.
living crime should be punished with living crime. -
punish his brother
his brother deserve death more..
-
this kind of brother , nobody would want
brother so nice help him take drug to pay off loan shark
in the end, this kind of thing happen.. -
Uh... reminds me of the Counterstrike map es_jailbreak.Originally posted by SMAPLionHeart:i might rescue him if im a gurkha -
That should be the way. The 2 criminal may have similiar cases but not similiar circumstances. U're saying they should all be viewed the same regardless of their motivation?Originally posted by acotis:1) There will be double standards. Two criminals with similar cases may be judged differently.
B4 UK abolished the death sentence altogether, they decided that for capital crimes like murder, it was mandatory to consider the motivation.
For eg. A woman who had been subject to many years of abuse from her cheating, drunkard of a husband, who finally snaps and kills him in a moment of rage. During the killing she is aware that she is committing a crime. But she does so because she can't take it anymore, and she feels she has no option left. The law was changed such that it was considered unethical to sentence this woman to death just because she committed murder.
And for goodness sake, do not start the, "she should die because she could have seek help from social group" argument. That is irrelevant, because she was suffering and that suffering was the motivation behind the killing.
U know that for sure? That the Triads didn't tell him "If u do not do this for us we WILL kill your brother" or something?Originally posted by acotis:He could have helped his sibling via other ways but instead had to choose a way that would harm others.
U know for sure, 100% sure, that he had other ways of helping his sibling? If u don't how can u say it is justified that he dies? He didn't commit a crime out of personal greed. That counts for a lot as far as I can see.
Seriously from all of your thinking here, u must be the kind of people who watch Robin Hood movies and think "he should be excecuted for being a serial robber and career criminal." -
As a matter of fact , Robin Hood can't survive in singapore.
MIW would torture and skin him alive. -
You have very good heart when making comment on Sinagpore's death sentence for this guy.Originally posted by HENG@:U know that for sure? That the Triads didn't tell him "If u do not do this for us we WILL kill your brother" or something?
U know for sure, 100% sure, that he had other ways of helping his sibling? If u don't how can u say it is justified that he dies? He didn't commit a crime out of personal greed. That counts for a lot as far as I can see.
Seriously from all of your thinking here, u must be the kind of people who watch Robin Hood movies and think "he should be excecuted for being a serial robber and career criminal."
I know this family. The mother is very nice woman. She is a single mum and very hard working. It was really hard for her to bring up her sons. She worked from Mon to Sun for two shops as a hair dresser to support the family. The kids were born when they escaped from VN war. Coming to Australia as refugees, life wasnt easy at all. Being single mother and working hard like this, it was probably didnt have enough time to keep an eye on the kids since the early days, but she could convey the love among the family members. That could more or less say about the sacrifice of one brother's life to the other's. It is really painful for her.
Everyone makes mistake in life when we are young. But this mistake costs too much. It is true that will we be doing nothing when our family member is threatened to death in this situation? You probably understand the black society's rules.
Of course, smugling drugs need to have tough sentence, but this case is just inhuman consideration sentence. Sinagporeans they have their own arguments to enforce their law. We just can't do anything. I appreciate your sympathy for the family. -
they are not stiff like us.
-
sigh...Originally posted by transaihien:You have very good heart when making comment on Sinagpore's death sentence for this guy.
I know this family. The mother is very nice woman. She is a single mum and very hard working. It was really hard for her to bring up her sons. She worked from Mon to Sun for two shops as a hair dresser to support the family. The kids were born when they escaped from VN war. Coming to Australia as refugees, life wasnt easy at all. Being single mother and working hard like this, it was probably didnt have enough time to keep an eye on the kids since the early days, but she could convey the love among the family members. That could more or less say about the sacrifice of one brother's life to the other's. It is really painful for her.
Everyone makes mistake in life when we are young. But this mistake costs too much. It is true that will we be doing nothing when our family member is threatened to death in this situation? You probably understand the black society's rules.
Of course, smugling drugs need to have tough sentence, but this case is just inhuman consideration sentence. Sinagporeans they have their own arguments to enforce their law. We just can't do anything. I appreciate your sympathy for the family.
what will happen to the other brother who's in the clutches of the triad?