As the circus court act is taking place and viewers are engrossed with the show, it's time to revisit the motivation for staging this circus. It's been rumoured since decades that students in our universities sleep with lecturers in exchange for better grades. So why aren't the rest of the lechers caught? Besides the articles that portrayed PAP in a negative light written by Tey that singled him out, could he be persecuted to serve as a warning to the rest of the lechers eg. in the law, social sciences faculties not to badmouth the PAP to the students and the world?
-
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
Looking beyond the persecution of Tey Tsun Hang
- Thread starter SgGoneWrong
- Start date
Are you tey? Since when does it become common and accepted norm to sleep with teachers and lecturers?
Tey is a cheapo tikko. Serve him right to be caught and shamed.
Tey case is so clear cut. Both admitted having sex. Both also admitted the expensive gifts. Note the girl is not from a super rich family and the gifts are all from her to tey, and none from tey. Corruption is corruption. Don't try to mix it up. Tey deserves it.
Look at title, ex-Sinkie like me also scared uh
"Supreme, Supine, Suppliant"
Ooi, Tey Tsun Hang "lu mm zai see ah"
In Hongland am I, fear I need not have
Monday I'll walk to Pokfulam where Uni is
And buy my copy to slowly, slowly read
http://www.law.hku.hk/ccpl/pub/TeyTsunHang.html
Zis, Hongkie Uni say one arh, not I say, don't believe just click above link:
Tey's book "builds on meticulously mined case-law, to illuminate issues ranging from the use of civil defamation proceedings to tackle political dissent, the use of death penalty and criminal due process, to arrive at some insights into the core political values enforced by the Singapore judiciary. It is a careful study of what goes into its decision-making and reasoning process. It throws a great deal of light on how the Singapore judiciary has bought into – wholesale - the political emphasis on the supreme importance of government in human affairs, and on the overriding priority of stability and status quo - a worldview that emphasises respect for hierarchical relationships, that privileges the collective over the individual, and regards voices different from the dominant political discourse as dangerous to Singapore’s social and political order.
With impressive zeal, Tey works through a massive amount of jurisprudence to expose its Legalistic thinking. But it also paints a disturbing picture, of a worldview that challenges the assumptions about the primacy of individual rights and the essential principles of constitutional reasoning that lie at the heart of democratic systems. The broader thesis seems to be that the Singapore Consensus could not have been constructed without its Legal Consensus, itself a result of the consistent complicity of the Singapore judiciary. This book hints at the power relations and dynamics between the political establishment and the Singapore judiciary."
"Supreme, Supine, Suppliant"
Ooi, Tey Tsun Hang "lu mm zai see ah"
In Hongland am I, fear I need not have
Monday I'll walk to Pokfulam where Uni is
And buy my copy to slowly, slowly read
http://www.law.hku.hk/ccpl/pub/TeyTsunHang.html
Zis, Hongkie Uni say one arh, not I say, don't believe just click above link:
Tey's book "builds on meticulously mined case-law, to illuminate issues ranging from the use of civil defamation proceedings to tackle political dissent, the use of death penalty and criminal due process, to arrive at some insights into the core political values enforced by the Singapore judiciary. It is a careful study of what goes into its decision-making and reasoning process. It throws a great deal of light on how the Singapore judiciary has bought into – wholesale - the political emphasis on the supreme importance of government in human affairs, and on the overriding priority of stability and status quo - a worldview that emphasises respect for hierarchical relationships, that privileges the collective over the individual, and regards voices different from the dominant political discourse as dangerous to Singapore’s social and political order.
With impressive zeal, Tey works through a massive amount of jurisprudence to expose its Legalistic thinking. But it also paints a disturbing picture, of a worldview that challenges the assumptions about the primacy of individual rights and the essential principles of constitutional reasoning that lie at the heart of democratic systems. The broader thesis seems to be that the Singapore Consensus could not have been constructed without its Legal Consensus, itself a result of the consistent complicity of the Singapore judiciary. This book hints at the power relations and dynamics between the political establishment and the Singapore judiciary."
Last edited:
Lor yah or lor yaw, me Asterix surely am not
Stomach filled and brain dulled me also not
But me knows a good read when one I see
To think zis case got nothing to do with book
Quite naive, is what as layman I will say
Twenty Sinkie dollars only bery cheap
Click below for order form. I've read somewhere that Hong Kong has strict privacy laws. HK Uni will not disclose your details to SG government, why should they, you are their customer and protected under the Personal Data (Privacy) .... what ah ...... Oh-dee-nun? Translate - Ordinance (same as Act in Sinkieland lah).
http://www.law.hku.hk/ccpl/pub/TTHOrderForm.pdf
Stomach filled and brain dulled me also not
But me knows a good read when one I see
To think zis case got nothing to do with book
Quite naive, is what as layman I will say
Twenty Sinkie dollars only bery cheap
Click below for order form. I've read somewhere that Hong Kong has strict privacy laws. HK Uni will not disclose your details to SG government, why should they, you are their customer and protected under the Personal Data (Privacy) .... what ah ...... Oh-dee-nun? Translate - Ordinance (same as Act in Sinkieland lah).
http://www.law.hku.hk/ccpl/pub/TTHOrderForm.pdf
Last edited:
If you have attended unis before, these girls are discovering the thrill of premarital sex. One girl in our class attended her tutorials full of love bites, telling the world she is a cock magnet. The law girls are always parading themselves in expensive dresses trying to appear sophisticated, eschewing the plain T shirts and clutching notes by their less gifted students taking up other social science courses.
The expats lecturers had a great time, some eventually marrying their students. Tey is handsome and brainy, its all about jiak bak. Even Monica Lewinsky is more than willing to suck Clinton's dick and have his cigar shoved into her vagina.
The 60% voted for it. Let the kangaroo process follow their masters’ agenda. CPIB would use the blunderbuss approach by calling in everyone, even remotely to lim kopi and use every conceivable means to extract confessions, even to things one never did. One colleague was called in by CPIB, he was so traumatized that his even considered suicide. Not improbable since this is common when red guards went riot in China.
If you are smart, you should attend some waterboarding courses conducted by ex CIA. They can't be torturing you for more than 3 days straight. Your conviction is secured once you rely on their false assurances and voluntarily agree to everything they put in your statements, while making it very difficult to correct them. They have years of experience, which you had none. There is this lady who confessed to being a pusher dealing all kinds of drugs in Woodlands. Her answers must be so confusing and vague to her interrogators so the Home minister decided to put her in Section 55 instead. There must be a written manual somewhere how to confound people who used every conceivable means win a conviction.
So what does it mean to a bright Joe who wants to get ahead by cutting corners which he thought was innocent? They says the risks of having kids with severe mental abnormality affects equally, whether rich or poor, if you're a Indian or a Chinese. Your chances of being kangarooed is equal, including your children when they grown up, if PAP continues to think that rule of law does not apply in Singapore.
The expats lecturers had a great time, some eventually marrying their students. Tey is handsome and brainy, its all about jiak bak. Even Monica Lewinsky is more than willing to suck Clinton's dick and have his cigar shoved into her vagina.
The 60% voted for it. Let the kangaroo process follow their masters’ agenda. CPIB would use the blunderbuss approach by calling in everyone, even remotely to lim kopi and use every conceivable means to extract confessions, even to things one never did. One colleague was called in by CPIB, he was so traumatized that his even considered suicide. Not improbable since this is common when red guards went riot in China.
If you are smart, you should attend some waterboarding courses conducted by ex CIA. They can't be torturing you for more than 3 days straight. Your conviction is secured once you rely on their false assurances and voluntarily agree to everything they put in your statements, while making it very difficult to correct them. They have years of experience, which you had none. There is this lady who confessed to being a pusher dealing all kinds of drugs in Woodlands. Her answers must be so confusing and vague to her interrogators so the Home minister decided to put her in Section 55 instead. There must be a written manual somewhere how to confound people who used every conceivable means win a conviction.
So what does it mean to a bright Joe who wants to get ahead by cutting corners which he thought was innocent? They says the risks of having kids with severe mental abnormality affects equally, whether rich or poor, if you're a Indian or a Chinese. Your chances of being kangarooed is equal, including your children when they grown up, if PAP continues to think that rule of law does not apply in Singapore.
Last edited:
It is an unsubstantiated claim to say that it is a common occurrence that students sleep with lecturers. It is similar to what is often claimed -- that cab drivers are the best source of info in S'pore. None of these claims have any credibility.
Interesting analysis.
Times have changed, but one suspects sluts remain exceptional rather than normative.
Maybe you should run an impartial poll in the internet to prove you are right. Its impossible so I won't take the challenge. Psychiatrists and therapists have been known to sleep with their patients. Unless you are one of those who cannot look a girl full in the eye to avoid any emotional response, or whipped your back raw like a monk or take cold showers very often, the same dynamics occur during a lecturer student tutorial section. I think I would get a hard-on just seeing them breathe. Even female teachers have been convicted of having sex with their teenage students. Tey was having sex with a girl who knows at least some rudimentary law on age of consent. What is the world coming to? Normative behaviors are always evolving. The old fart still thinks the golden age of mankind are the Victorian era. Even make his uni pang sai mate the CJ with his extreme interpretation of the law. As for relying on sinkie cab driver for his view of the economy, only a twit would do that. Every time I sit on a cab, I would explain to them why PAP is bad for our future, thanks to the nice tit-bits from the forum and much thanks to Sam for hosting one.
There is no such thing as an "impartial poll in the internet". It's a contradiction in terms.
Ah, we are just quarreling with semantics. Maybe PAP commissioned polls are the the most impartial.
You are either tey himself or a very confused fellow. It is NOT a norm for students to fuck teachers, patients to screw doctors etc because of the potential abuse and conflict of interest. Hence tey fucking his students and even accepting expensive gifts is clearly corruption. This has nothing to do with politics, but society norm and decency.
Does tey even love the students that he screwed? Was he even on verge of divorcing his wife and marrying the student? Clearly not as he is merely abusing his position.
Its a very simple and straight forward case. Someone complained that he received gifts from his student. Just let him tell the world and the court that he did not receive any gifts or that the gifts were well within the rules in terms of value and there is no conflict of interest.
It has taken on epic proportion because he himself decided to make it epic.
It has taken on epic proportion because he himself decided to make it epic.
What's the stats on this? Males students sleeping with female lecturers or females sleeping with male lecturers
17 years ago, something similar happened to one Dr. Christopher Lingle. He was on a fellowship at NUS. He wrote an article that simply "inferred that some regimes in East Asia are able to thwart criticism by relying on a compliant judiciary". Note - Singapore was not even specifically mentioned by name. Within two weeks he had been interrogated repeatedly by police detectives. He fled this Sink Hole in a panic. The State Mafia seized his property and sentenced him to jail in absentia.
In 1996, Old Fart's lawyer argued for at least $300K in damages but Justice S. Rajendran awarded only $70K. This judge regularly awarded LOW damages for defamation suits initiated by the PAPzis. It is not surprisely that when he reached retirement age, his appointment was not extended, as is done on a regular basis due to acute shortage of good judges. Noticed what happened to Justice Pillai?
Dr. Lingle comments: "I am not surprised by the Singapore judge's ruling. I guess the courts didn't see the irony in the judgment against me. As far as I can see it, the judgement vindicates me and supports the criticism that Singapore's rulers use a compliant judiciary to bankrupt their critics .. whether they are the political opposition or news media or foreign nationals."
I placed this here because it just crossed my mind that many youngsters have no memory of the events surrounding Lingle. Assuming one starts to read and UNDERSTAND independent newspapers at the age of 10, you need to be at least 27 years old to have living memory of these events. Of course, even a fool can see that ST is not independent.
http://singaporeconsensus.wordpress...ing-of-singapores-supreme-political-ideology/
As a layman, it is not difficult for me to compare the articles available at Tey's blog (click above) with Lingle's relatively innocuous remarks where Singapore was not even mentioned by name. I have no time to read all the articles, but this one "Judicial Internalising of Singapore’s Supreme Political Ideology" does have a section specifically dedicated to our ridiculous laws of defamation. If Lingle can be FIXED in the manner mentioned above, just by Tey's very overt language alone, in the eyes of the PAPzis he deserves to be FIXED far more thoroughly. Better that the FIX involves an offence alleging dishonesty, so that he cannot be another Lingle - join a foreign academic institution and continue to criticise the LEEgime from afar.
The price of freedom is ETERNAL VIGILANCE. Cheers, Asterix.
For more on Lingle's case from the horse's mouth, please click here:
http://www.thelockeinstitute.org/books/lingle.html
In 1996, Old Fart's lawyer argued for at least $300K in damages but Justice S. Rajendran awarded only $70K. This judge regularly awarded LOW damages for defamation suits initiated by the PAPzis. It is not surprisely that when he reached retirement age, his appointment was not extended, as is done on a regular basis due to acute shortage of good judges. Noticed what happened to Justice Pillai?
Dr. Lingle comments: "I am not surprised by the Singapore judge's ruling. I guess the courts didn't see the irony in the judgment against me. As far as I can see it, the judgement vindicates me and supports the criticism that Singapore's rulers use a compliant judiciary to bankrupt their critics .. whether they are the political opposition or news media or foreign nationals."
I placed this here because it just crossed my mind that many youngsters have no memory of the events surrounding Lingle. Assuming one starts to read and UNDERSTAND independent newspapers at the age of 10, you need to be at least 27 years old to have living memory of these events. Of course, even a fool can see that ST is not independent.
http://singaporeconsensus.wordpress...ing-of-singapores-supreme-political-ideology/
As a layman, it is not difficult for me to compare the articles available at Tey's blog (click above) with Lingle's relatively innocuous remarks where Singapore was not even mentioned by name. I have no time to read all the articles, but this one "Judicial Internalising of Singapore’s Supreme Political Ideology" does have a section specifically dedicated to our ridiculous laws of defamation. If Lingle can be FIXED in the manner mentioned above, just by Tey's very overt language alone, in the eyes of the PAPzis he deserves to be FIXED far more thoroughly. Better that the FIX involves an offence alleging dishonesty, so that he cannot be another Lingle - join a foreign academic institution and continue to criticise the LEEgime from afar.
The price of freedom is ETERNAL VIGILANCE. Cheers, Asterix.
For more on Lingle's case from the horse's mouth, please click here:
http://www.thelockeinstitute.org/books/lingle.html
Last edited:
We all know that Scroobal is cunning. So, when he says it is "simple and straight forward", one can immediately tell that it is NOT.
Mr. SCREWEDbrains, do you even know what the charge is? It is for CORRUPTION. Meaning there must be a bargain. I scratch your back, you scratch mine. In real life, ScrewedBalls know all about this - he scratches the PAPzis back, they scratch his. So, come election time, ScrewedBalls will question this or that Oppo candidate's credentials to get his stipend.
http://sammyboy.com/showthread.php?89550-The-Chen-Show-Mao-Affair
In this context, the prosecution has to prove BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT that BOTH parties struck a bargain - she agrees to give him sex, he agrees to up her grades. It's NOT just about conflict of interest, you conniving old man. There is no such criminal offence.
This from the prosecution's "star" witness: "When asked by Tey what was the true state of affairs, Ms Ko said: "I only bought Prof Tey the gifts because I liked him and we were in a relationship." But Mr Teng didn't buy this answer, she said. Ms Ko said he told her that it was not possible for a girl to buy a guy gifts. She said Mr Teng also insisted that the reason why she bought those gifts was so that Tey would show her favour vis-a-vis her grades. Ms Ko said she was told she was not allowed to go home until the CPIB recorded a statement from her. When asked if the statement was accurate, Ms Ko said it wasn't. She said the inaccuracy pertained to her motivation for showering Tey with gifts.”
http://sammyboy.com/showthread.php?...’t-be-fooled-by-the-Latest-Sex-Scandal!/page3
So there you are - the D team's "star" witness said she did not do it to get better grades and Fat Teng forced an admission out of her. Case collapses if SG were a First World country. Unfortunately, SG is a Third World country as far as its KANGAROO judicial system is concerned and the D standard prosecution is aided by a compliant judiciary. We must be clear and always call a spade a spade. In the meantime, the D standard clowns - police, prosecution, judge - are all paid "out of this world" salaries ... ... to keep them COMPLIANT.
Last edited:
@ watchman8,
We did not say it's common or a norm for students to sleep with lecturers but it has been done by many. Perhaps you were a lone ranger in uni with your head stuck in the books and you didn't socialize with anyone to get any news. Who is to decide societial norm and decency? You? And based on what?
I find the comparison of patients sleep with doctors and students sleeping with teachers disturbing. Besides your generalization of conflict of interests and abuse of power, you miss out many crucial factors eg. Mental capacity to make sound decisions and calculated gains/ losses. You have simply deduced through your 'societal norm' that all students are passive objects who lack the mental capacity to strike deals which are not within your definition of 'decency'.
Lastly, I cannot understand why you are so offended to call 2 forumers Tey just because we do not agree with you.
We did not say it's common or a norm for students to sleep with lecturers but it has been done by many. Perhaps you were a lone ranger in uni with your head stuck in the books and you didn't socialize with anyone to get any news. Who is to decide societial norm and decency? You? And based on what?
I find the comparison of patients sleep with doctors and students sleeping with teachers disturbing. Besides your generalization of conflict of interests and abuse of power, you miss out many crucial factors eg. Mental capacity to make sound decisions and calculated gains/ losses. You have simply deduced through your 'societal norm' that all students are passive objects who lack the mental capacity to strike deals which are not within your definition of 'decency'.
Lastly, I cannot understand why you are so offended to call 2 forumers Tey just because we do not agree with you.
Perhaps you are right. Perhaps. However, does it negate the criminal act by Tey ?
There might have been hearsay about a few students sleeping with lecturers over the years, but that remains merely hearsay. When a lecturer is facing trial being accused of such an act it, because someone filed a complaint, then it moves from being hearsay to being a concrete allegation. The Court will decide the proof of the allegation.
For every one criminal caught and successfully prosecuted for a crime, X number may never be found out. It does not make the crime committed by those successfully brought to book any less wrong. Those who think this should not be so have a very misplaced sense of righteousness and morality. They are simply being Quixotic, tilting at windmills.
For every one criminal caught and successfully prosecuted for a crime, X number may never be found out. It does not make the crime committed by those successfully brought to book any less wrong. Those who think this should not be so have a very misplaced sense of righteousness and morality. They are simply being Quixotic, tilting at windmills.
Wrong. The accusation is not sleeping with students. That is NOT a criminal offence. The charge here is CORRUPTION. Sex in exchange for grades. Which the star prosecution witness has already denied vehemently in open court and stated unequivocally that she was forced by Mafia CPIB to sign a statement. See post # 15 for details. Could you please be so kind as to let me know which part of that post you do not understand?
A complaint can be easily planted. Just as "someone" can easily register at SammyBoy and thereafter perform his paid role as a PAP IB by making allegations against this or that Oppo figure. As a former student of NUS law fac, I know for a FACT that there are many students there whose parents are PAP MPs, Ministars, cronies, etc. And I avoid all of them, especially since one of their fathers had the temerity to say that the NTUC is part of the Govt, therefore an NTUC employee who joined an Oppo Party deserved to be fired. It ain't difficult to get these sons or daughters of PAP Minions to file a complaint.
I note your use of the adjective "concrete" before allegation. Nice try at Jedi mind trick. If I were not a novice Jedi, I too would not have spotted it. An allegation is just that - an accusation. There is nothing concrete about it. Your buddy here, Watchman8, has accused 2 people of being Tey. Your buddy in the other thread, ChewCheng, has accused me of being Tey as well, in addition to other things - gay, woman, an exile in HK, blah, blah, blah. Concrete my foot. BULLSHIT is a much better adjective. Any Tom, Dick or Harry can make an unsubstantiated accusation especially if they have a vested interest in making the false charge stick e.g. daddy's lucrative contract with a Government (read PAP) linked entity.
It is NOT about righteousness and morality. Diversity is an equally important right. Only certain societal norms are incorporated into the criminal law. The rest - like adultery, smoking, etc are all left to the individual to decide.
What is before the Court is whether CORRUPTION has been proved by the prosecution BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT. This is the societal norm that has been incorporated into the criminal law - that bribery is bad for society as a whole and ought to be punished with jail or fine. If as a prosecutor you fail to understand this, a First World judge will not just call you Quixotic. He will say you are not qualified to appear before him.
Righteousness? Morality? OK, I concede that it is morally wrong for:
1) the CPIB to extract admissions and confessions through the use of Mafia tactics;
2) the Prosecution and the Judge to play dirty tricks in the process of hearing the case to deny the accused a fair trial;
3) the State to use resources meant for the protection of ordinary citizens against criminals to attack its critics;
4) to ensure that critics and those thinking of criticising are effectively silenced, the State to use the Media to manipulate the minds of daft Sinkies so that even if the accused were acquitted it is impossible for him or her and all those associated with him even remotely to live an ordinary life (Ng Boon Gay, Cecilia Sue, Peter Lim, CHC, etc);
5) for Sinkies to be unable to look beyond their nose and understand that forced confessions and trial by media is bad for everyone, because they could be the next victim.
I can go on and on, but these are only some of the things that are morally wrong with the way this case has been pursued by our KANGAROO system.
Sammyboy's next security question - Q: What animal is most frequently associated with Sinkie Courts? A: KANGAROO
Last edited:
So if a thief claims in court that he did not steal, that is good enough to declare him innocent? No need to consider other evidence?
A full time student from a middle class family gave several gifts worth over a thousand bucks to her lecturer, while the lecturer gave nothing back in return. In addition to having sex with the lecturer in his office when she is taking a module taught by the said lecturer. Smell a rat, no?
Similar threads
