Time is not always a good indicator. Efficiency does not equate to efficacy. In politics, being patient is a virtue. Mahathir is known for holding on to "people's painful leg" and choosing his own time to twist or press further.
-
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.
Fixing the Opposition Again? Please don’t be fooled by the Latest Sex Scandal!
- Thread starter Rumpole
- Start date
WP gave him the chance to come clean. Yaw refused and went back into a hole. So they had no choice to sack him.
There are so many bloggers out there who are also quite anti government. Why are they not fixed but this Tey fella whom I have never heard of as a PAP critics until his "misadventure" with a student came to light.
When someone is being fixed, I think of Anwar. If Tey screwed his student, that's not fixed. Unless of course the girl is sent by PAP to let him screw. Possible?
A professor at law school NUS is different from an ordinary blogger. The vast majority of the legal fraternity is trained there. That is also why they send Tommy Koh and Walter Woon away as ambassadors - so they can't sow the seeds of future trouble by getting young minds to be infatuated with such ideals as freedom of speech, right of assembly, rule of law, blah, blah, blah. Also, the professor gives lectures in places like Hong Kong, criticising Singapore's legal system in the process, makes PAP lose face and standing in the international community, especially since he will be introduced at the lecture as a distinguished professor from Singapore's top law school. Wow, a professor from SG's top law school criticising SG's legal system - more impact then a mere journalist like Alan Shadrake. First world universities will think twice about setting up branch campuses in SG - notice Yale is already having trouble explaining to its stakeholders the decision to have a branch campus in SG with no right to hold student protests.
If really that's the case, when she was being screwed, her thought was "For PAP!!!" Holding back tears and faking orgasm....
Give that gal a Tiger!
Isn't exam paper moderated by the panel of the exam board too before final results are confirmed? The girl will have to take risk to exchange sex for grades, worth it?
perhaps not.
maybe she was thinking of the $$$$ she will be getting. and enjoying the screw at the same time.
Hahaha...maybe the one who choose the mole also crossed-eyed?
Valid point bro. Even if the PAPies are really after him, we have to admit that Tey presented them with a gun for them to shoot him dead.
Precisely.
Even if Tey had screwed a high class hooker not in Sinkland soil, they would still 'get him'.
So it was just an opportunity presented, at the right time and a 'pending target', that they decide to move in.
If Tey had been a private business man who had screwed to get contracts to his company. They would have closed 'BOTH eyes'!
I do not agree. Medical doctor Dr Ananth Tambyah, also a professor, who is a SDP member is no ordinary man on the street. He is one of those who advocated for change in Singapore's health care system. I don't see SDP or Dr Tambyah being "fixed". SDP makes PAP lose face more than any one else.
Alan Shadrake is not a "mere journalist". He is stubborn, stood his grounds and was jailed. He is what we Chinese say, "got back bone", unlike some professor Tey who cannot keep his manhood inside his pants. By saying Shadrake as a "mere journalist", you are disregarding Shadrake's efforts, belittling Shadrake and highlighting Tey's nobleness, or Tey's stupidity of crossing the moral boundaries between a mentor and student. If Tey kept his manhood within his pants, you won't have to defend him.
I do not see how 1 horny law professor has the ability to stop world class universities to set up shop in Singapore.
Never fixed anyone before and am not saying that Tey definitely was fixed, but if one is so inclined to fix those that oppose you, some rules of thumb are:
- objective is to discredit someone, make sure your own credibility is not damaged in the process
- conviction is the means to an end and not an end in itself, you can still achieve your objective even if there is an acquittal especially if you control the media and can use it to shape public perception, also you may not necessarily have to use the criminal process for every target i.e. some can be fixed in other ways and in fact it is better to use a variety of ways then it becomes more difficult for the layman to spot
- do not fix too many at the same time as again it becomes too obvious plus some people have problem with multi-tasking
- avoid fixing close to major events like elections for people will question your motives
- you don't have to fix ALL who oppose you, just SOME and the others will withdraw from opposing you and also reduce risk of damaging your own credibility in the process
- many other rules and tactics that I am not aware of
- like other things in life, fixing is an ART and not a science
So, why doctor is not fixed YET. Don't know but could be any one or more of the above reasons.
SDP has already been fixed before. Can't keep on fixing the same group of people then it becomes too obvious. Maybe after a decent lapse of time to allow memories to fade then PAP can target SDP again.
As for Shadrake, journalists don't always get it right especially when reporting on an area for which they have not been formally trained. Whether he has backbone or not is besides the point.
Adultery is not a criminal offence, neither is sleeping with a student so long as it is consensual and she is not a minor. The latter may constitute a breach of the Uni's Code of Conduct, but that is a matter between the Uni' and the Professor - contract between employer and employee. Being horny is not in itself a crime, on the contrary it may well be a sign of a well rounded personality i.e. not the scholar type that only knows how to memorise and regurgitate. But of course, while not being a crime one has to remember "there is a time and place for everything, a time to sow and a time to reap, a time for war and a time for peace, a time to live and a time to DIE ..."
The crux of the offence is sex FOR grades equals corruption and it is for the prosecution to prove all the required elements of the crime beyond reasonable doubt which is a high threshold. The accused does not have to prove anything, he just has to cast reasonable doubt. If after presenting all its evidence, the prosecution has not made out a prima facie case, the defence may not even be called and the accused is acquitted there and then but this is very rare in Singapore especially at the Sub-courts level which is the level for the Prof's case because Sub-court judges are unduly deferential to prosecutors. Don't know why, maybe no backbone unlike Shadrake.
Last edited:
Adultery is not a criminal offence, neither is sleeping with a student so long as it is consensual and she is not a minor. The latter may constitute a breach of the Uni's Code of Conduct, but that is a matter between the Uni' and the Professor - contract between employer and employee. Being horny is not in itself a crime, on the contrary it may well be a sign of a well rounded personality i.e. not the scholar type that only knows how to memorise and regurgitate. But of course, while not being a crime one has to remember "there is a time and place for everything, a time to sow and a time to reap, a time for war and a time for peace, a time to live and a time to DIE ..."
The crux of the offence is sex FOR grades equals corruption and it is for the prosecution to prove all the required elements of the crime beyond reasonable doubt which is a high threshold. The accused does not have to prove anything, he just has to cast reasonable doubt. If after presenting all its evidence, the prosecution has not made out a prima facie case, the defence may not even be called and the accused is acquitted there and then but this is very rare in Singapore especially at the Sub-courts level which is the level for the Prof's case because Sub-court judges are unduly deferential to prosecutors. Don't know why, maybe no backbone unlike Shadrake.
Prof Tey certainly is thinking along these lines when he bonked the girl. I am just morally wrong, nothing criminal. However, did he not realise that being the mentor to the student and having an affair with her is playing with fire? There is clearly a conflict of interest. Even if I am to give him the benefit of doubt that he is just horny and never promise her anything in regards to her grades. Don't you think that if their affair is discovered, a simple letter to CPIB alleging sex for grade between them from any of the other law students will land him in trouble? CPIB loves such high profile cases. Any likelihood of corrupt practice they will sure act on it. Worth the trouble just for the fling?
With his look and income, no trouble finding a mistress outside if his Jap wife is unable to satisfy his need. To screw his student is the most stupid thing one can do.
This type of dumb ass needs no fixing. He is more than capable of self imploding.
Like I said, it is for the prosecution to prove ALL the elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. This means to prove:
(a) he had sex with the girl; AND
(b) there was bargain that he would give her good grades in return for the pleasure she had given him.
If they fail to prove ALL of the above, he is innocent of the crime for which he is charged PERIOD.
The fact that a member of the public can jump to the conclusion that "this type of dumb ass needs no fixing, he is more than capable of self imploding" just proves my point that conviction is the means to an end and not an end in itself. If you control the media, you can shape public perceptions simply through biased reporting of the fact that he was charged. Through this you achieve your objective, discredit your target, without the need to get a conviction. This is what is called "trial by media" and a fair justice system has rules (contempt of court, gag orders, etc) to prevent that. We have those rules in SG. Why were these rules not invoked here? Who leaked the details of the gifts, photos, etc to the mainstream media? Why does the mainstream media dutifully disclose such material without questioning whether or not they could be charged for contempt of court by doing acts that would "prejudice a fair trial"? In the Westminster model, the only institution that has the right to conduct a trial of the accused is the Court (aided by the prosecution and the defence) and NOT the media.
In developed countries, prosecution when queried by the press will inevitably say something like this "the case is now before the courts and I am not allowed to disclose anything further because the matter is now sub-judice (before the courts)". "Sub-judice" sounds familiar? Pinky Loon said the issue of Hougang by-election is now sub-judice, he can't talk more about it, even to Parliament because that would be seen to be interfering with the work of the Courts. So, why the double standards?
In France, the press is not even allowed to print photos of an accused being hand-cuffed and led away, because that would cause "trial by media" and unjustly affect a person's reputation. The accused can be acquitted later, but the picture will stick in the minds of the unthinking plebians. Dominique Strauss Kahn was shown hand-cuffed by the US media and it caused an uproar in France, the country credited with starting the European age of ENLIGHTENMENT. It seems a signficant portion of the SINKIE public is still living in the dark ages.
So, the moral of the story is, do not be too quick to judge, especially if the news source is the mainstream media in SG and always remember, a man or woman is INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY and it is for the prosecution to prove ALL of the elements of the crime BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT.
An enlightened electorate, capable of critical thinking, is one of the essential ingredients in a dish called democracy. Without such an electorate, the mission is hopeless, no matter what sort of institutions you have, because they can be easily bypassed through clever manipulation of the simple minds of the plebians.
With this Your Honour, I rest my case ...
Last edited:
Granted, I might have jumped to conclusion that he had screwed his student. However, you must also note that CPIB usually would not proceed with the charge if they do not have evidence to secure a conviction.
Between him being fixed for being a critic and him corruptly obtained sex as gratification, whereby both are yet to be proven, I am more incline to believe the latter.
Between him being fixed for being a critic and him corruptly obtained sex as gratification, whereby both are yet to be proven, I am more incline to believe the latter.
One usually will not be fined a mere $1,000 for asking someone to take the rap for speeding offences, not once but twice unless one is an unusual plastic surgeon. One usually will not be acquited of criminal defamation (max 2 years imprisonment) but sent to IMH for detention at the President's pleasure unless the person that one allegedly defamed is somewhat unusual. The list goes on ...
Last edited:
