32 years jail for Sinkie Paedophile

[Watchman]

http://blip.tv/file/2673588

 

[Kid278]

Would a 3 month probation for the poor motherfucker do brother?

Nope, that's sarcasm. I am no judge, no god and certainly no evil. I repeat what I said earlier I do not condone what he did and I believe probation is certainly not justice for the victims. He's guilty he shall be punished, the question is how dispassionate judges are going to go. Laws precribed are not always justice dispense, atleast not both ways.:p

 

[goh chok tong]

If Sinkies don't get their backsides poked, I would worry.:p

 

[Kid278]

If you feel 32 years without freedom is as good as being hanged; perhaps we should put the pedophile out of his misery and just plain hang him. I know where the chink compassion and justice come from; so spare me the lecture. Its actually about justice not vengeance as you put it. Ask the parents of the cunts the pedophile fondled if justice was served. You are far too compassionate for your own kind. If the pedophile were an Ah Neh FT, well we'll have all the cockroaches out of the woodwork by now.

Hate do you no good, vengeance make you evil. You may have this odiom towards the paedophile but you certainly cant cancel his life, you're no god my friend. The crux here is about how we look at the judgement, is the 32 years coming from a clear mind looking at justice and not evil minds clouded by hatred or emotions. It's not about what justice the victims wants or the paedophile was someone else. In all justice compassion should go both ways, infact whatever ways whatever kind. Read the appeal judge's lines, I cant help but wonder, can he really tell there's a propensity to re-offend hence the consideration on prevention.:p

 

[tonychat]

You will saved your own ass if you just make a trip to Thailand and get a Thai gf there. I wonder what the hell is your SG gf doing since you claim to have a SG gf.

With the internet age, you can get advices anywhere if you sound unsinkified. Why make yourself being taken advantage by a bunch of sinkie judges with no respect for you.

Why stay in a country when its law totally overrated the females. Go to Thailand and get some decent respect from others.

But the catch it, you got to be unsinkified first. The Thais hate sinkie people or people who is sinkie influence (just look at thaksin, a trip to sinkieland cause his premiership)

 

[Kid278]

Any more questions? :oIo:

The question is do you have answers? Those quotes are no answers to evils of the mind. :p

 

[Lee Hsien Tau]

The thread about the Ram Puneet Tiwary trial is about Bench Trial v Jury Trial, the benefits, differences etc.

The sentence is due on Friday. You think which is more just?

Any comments from the Chow Ah Sengs at the Ram Puneet Tiwary thread? At least this is cut and dry.

 

[SamuelStalin]

We think he'd prefer the death penalty. Firing squad, lethal injection, whatever.

 

[Maverick01]

Emotions should not get in the way when looking at justice. Yes, not just one victim but a serial offender is not a repeat offender, there's a difference. I dont think his statement is senseless, it depends on how you look at judgement. You can be looking at being related to the victims, you can also be looking at being related to the paedophile. If compassion is anything to go by, it goes both ways. Justice is not about vengeance.:p

Serial offender is not repeat offender? How do you justify that? A serial offender committed several offences...its akin to repeating the offences after the first one...how do you gurantee that it would not be repeated in the future...justice is not about vengence...its all about apt punishment and detterent...32 yrs for his attack on nine young and helpless gals in my book is justified....thats my judgement...furthermore he be out in 20 yrs maybe....at early forties.....I think one need to see it from all perspectives not just the victim's....in fact i am asking those that made the comment to think in the perspective from those that are related to the girls..if its the victim's perspective that I am advocating, 32 yrs is surely non sufficient for the physical and pyschological abuse they suffered.....simple as that....and yes instead of simply making a third party comments, do spare a thought for the victims and apply the case hypothetically to someone that you know...perhaps you will have a better perspective of the severity of the crime and why a draconian punishment is definitely required.

 

[Beshitted]

Look. Those legs will open by themselves in another few years.

So what's the big deal.

I'd say 3 years is enough. Everyday, he'll be fed abalone 3 meals a day for them 3 years since he likes abalone so much.

I doubt he'll be likely to go within a mile of them slits after his release.

 

[Kid278]

Serial offender is not repeat offender? How do you justify that? A serial offender committed several offences...its akin to repeating the offences after the first one...how do you gurantee that it would not be repeated in the future...justice is not about vengence...its all about apt punishment and detterent...32 yrs for his attack on nine young and helpless gals in my book is justified....thats my judgement...furthermore he be out in 20 yrs maybe....at early forties.....I think one need to see it from all perspectives not just the victim's....in fact i am asking those that made the comment to think in the perspective from those that are related to the girls..if its the victim's perspective that I am advocating, 32 yrs is surely non sufficient for the physical and pyschological abuse they suffered.....simple as that....and yes instead of simply making a third party comments, do spare a thought for the victims and apply the case hypothetically to someone that you know...perhaps you will have a better perspective of the severity of the crime and why a draconian punishment is definitely required.

You're confused. It's not about justification, it's interpretation. An offender may have committed a series of offences prior to arrest but when apprehended he or she can only be charged as a first offender, like it or not it's the law. A repeat offender is someone convicted of an offence and punished before, he or she repeats a similar offence. A recalcitrant, so to speak.

When you look at justice, you look at what that's just and what that's fair. When you judge you dispense justice, you dont guarantee, you cant. Different penal code calls for different penalty and within there's maximum or minimum sentence. You can only puinish someone for the wrongs he or she has done, you cannot punish someone for wrongs you THINK he or she will do in the future, you're no god my friend.

You're entitiled to your own opinion, no challenge on that. Nonetheless, as judgement in all justice, perspective is one thing while having to be fair and just to the victims as well as the offender is quite another altogether. He being in his early forties upon release has no bearing unless you're saying that older paedophile will have leniency. Punishing him with justice in mind is one thing but to punish him with hate emotions in mind is quite another altogether regardless of how despicable and vile paedophiles are deem to society.:p