Big Sagat Dream Match of the Century. Calvin Cheng: Someone whom Raymond Ng has sued has v tragically committed suicide.

[Hightech88]

Follow Shan's way of criticism is safest..LOL...:

https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/criticise-a-minister-but-dont-sling-m&d-shanmugam

Responding to law students' questions about Singapore laws and their impact on free speech at a dialogue organised by students from the National University of Singapore Faculty of Law, Mr Shanmugam signalled that the Government was not about to soften its stance on defamation laws, even as he said the laws do not curtail political discussion.

Defamation laws, he said, are not there to stop people from criticising the Government, but exist to protect personal reputations.

"If you make a personal allegation of fact, if you say I took money, I am corrupt, I will then sue you and ask you to prove it. But if you say I am a stupid fool who doesn't know what I'm talking about, and the Government comprises ministers who don't know what they're talking about and you criticise every policy of the Government, no one can sue you," he said.

"By all means challenge my competence, by all means challenge my policies, by all means put forward alternate policies. By all means argue it, no problem. That's not defamation."

For public debate to be honest and meaningful, he added, political discussions should not descend into mudslinging.

------------------
Source

 

[laksaboy]

Ironically, her Twitter profile stated that she was a life coach. And yet she chose to off herself.

Whoever her clients were, it's probably too late to seek refunds now.

 

[Hightech88]

I have seen some of CC's remarks. I am not sure how he's going to get himself out of a knot

Not really, depending on who is your lawyer and law firm, black can always be twisted into white and vice versa, not forgetting the many shades of grey which are not so apparent whether it is black or white at first. But ultimately, it is the single judge who decides the verdict as we don't have a jury system here.

 

[oliverlee]

Follow Shan's way of criticism is safest..LOL...:

https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/criticise-a-minister-but-dont-sling-m&d-shanmugam

Responding to law students' questions about Singapore laws and their impact on free speech at a dialogue organised by students from the National University of Singapore Faculty of Law, Mr Shanmugam signalled that the Government was not about to soften its stance on defamation laws, even as he said the laws do not curtail political discussion.

Defamation laws, he said, are not there to stop people from criticising the Government, but exist to protect personal reputations.

"If you make a personal allegation of fact, if you say I took money, I am corrupt, I will then sue you and ask you to prove it. But if you say I am a stupid fool who doesn't know what I'm talking about, and the Government comprises ministers who don't know what they're talking about and you criticise every policy of the Government, no one can sue you," he said.

"By all means challenge my competence, by all means challenge my policies, by all means put forward alternate policies. By all means argue it, no problem. That's not defamation."

For public debate to be honest and meaningful, he added, political discussions should not descend into mudslinging.

------------------

one is allegation, one is opinion. A fine line sits in between, and for it to snap, depends on who holds the power

 

[Hightech88]

one is allegation, one is opinion. A fine line sits in between, and for it to snap, depends on who holds the power

Let's recap why RN & IK gang are suing CC as shown in this RN post below.

IMO, RN's argument against CC on defamation is not bullet-proof enough, by focusing too much on CC's words 'killing people' and equating it with 'murderers' which is quite taken out of context and stretching it too far.

It is obvious and arguable that the very statement made by CC 'spreading misinformation are literally killing people if they believe them' is not factually wrong as statistical facts have shown and been published by MOH on higher mortality rates in ICU cases for Non-Vaccinated vs those Vaccinated. Hence I believe CC's lawyers will likely argue from this angle.

https://vendshare.net/now-calvin-cheng-may-just-help-us-innovate-on-crowd-suing/

Now Calvin Cheng May Just Help Us Innovate On Crowd Suing​

Posted on September 7, 2024 by raymond

Now Calvin Cheng may just accidentally contribute to Singapore society accidentally without knowing it. In his comment on 21 June 2024 he said the follow comments that in our view is defamatory of a great number of people. Unwittingly, he included a wording known as “bunch of clowns” and in terms of tort laws can be seen very seriously, as he is defaming a group of people without even naming them. The screenshots are as follows;

In the context of the whole post, it can be read to be specifically making a comment that potentially can be defamation – namely that GMS, Iris Koh, Brad Bowyer are literally killing people. The term “killing people” is not to be taken lightly. In its plainest term, it can be seen as meaning that the people named has committed a murder charge under the Penal Code. That comment is highly defamatory.

But to top it off, he had to include “bunch of clowns”, which can be taken to be a group of people together with them holding on to the same stance. He is commenting that a great number of people being “murderers” as well. This would open up defamation lawsuit from this “bunch of clown” on him. There is already an ongoing defamation lawsuit on him from 5 of us, but this does not mean that the lawsuit is only open to only 5 of us.

It is open to any person who can be classified to what Calvin Cheng classified under “bunch of clowns”. For those who are willing to initiate legal proceedings on Calvin Cheng for defamation, we are willing to share our pleadings that you can use to initiate your proceeding litigant in person. Do note that none of us are lawyers, and if you proceed on to sue Calvin Cheng, you proceed on knowing the kind of responsibility filing a case in Court pursuing what is deemed a fair compensation for this comment.

Now with Artificial Intelligence and the Court system encouraging litigant in persons to sue without lawyers you don’t have to suffer in silence anymore. People who are elite in society must still stay responsible about the things they say, and if there is a slight and attack that should not happen, we can just sue for damages.

Calvin Cheng may accidentally contribute to society by being the party to be sued. And I don’t pity him for he is making a lot of comments that should have been moderated or not have been made at all.

Submit to me Your Legal Challenge​

-------------------

 

[yubenOh]

Kumgong. You can't anyhow sue anyone for defamation unless your name have been specifically mentioned or you can be identified through the public post by the person you intend to sue. Also you need to proof how that alleged defamation has affected and caused you loss. Knw the defamation context. How is calling anyone a bunch of clowns or stupid considered defamation when they can't be identified. The court can throw the vexatious suit out and the other party can also counter sue for duress, legal fees, time lost etc.

 

[tobelightlight]

It is open to any person who can be classified to what Calvin Cheng classified under “bunch of clowns”. For those who are willing to initiate legal proceedings on Calvin Cheng for defamation, we are willing to share our pleadings that you can use to initiate your proceeding litigant in person. Do note that none of us are lawyers, and if you proceed on to sue Calvin Cheng, you proceed on knowing the kind of responsibility filing a case in Court pursuing what is deemed a fair compensation for this comment.

Steady lah.. Can win money for travel liao. Thank you Calvin Cheng. Since you very rich, I demand not much money, just a nearby trip to chill and relax.

 

[wendychan]

basically you can sue anyone for anything if you have the money and the stamina.
i am living proof of that
and courts can throw out suits but it appears that is rare

 

[Balls2U]

Kumgong. You can't anyhow sue anyone for defamation unless your name have been specifically mentioned or you can be identified through the public post by the person you intend to sue. Also you need to proof how that alleged defamation has affected and caused you loss. Knw the defamation context. How is calling anyone a bunch of clowns or stupid considered defamation when they can't be identified. The court can throw the vexatious suit out and the other party can also counter sue for duress, legal fees, time lost etc.

The defamatory statement must be a statement of fact. Even if they can be identified, so what? They aren't clowns to start with. And how to prove that they are a joke or idiots in a court of law?

 

[JurongEast]

Hmmm Jin complicated person

https://www.ricemedia.co/current-af...-money-financial-scheme-vendshare-raymond-ng/

 

[JurongEast]

When franchisees started demanding answers, Raymond threatened to bring lawsuits for defamation and breach of contract, and severed communication by kicking them out of the franchisee Whatsapp group chat.

 

[Hightech88]

Sue ah sue. SMLJ also sue.

Source

 

[tobelightlight]

PAPib here working overtime leh.

Sue ah sue. SMLJ also sue.

Why cannot sue? Got sue means got WWE match for you to be so excited to watch mah. I thought you enjoy this kind of Drama.

Hmmm Jin complicated person

https://www.ricemedia.co/current-af...-money-financial-scheme-vendshare-raymond-ng/

You another PAPib here. working hard for your money. i also find people who do ib work very complicated. You can earn money by yourself doing so many other things yet choose to be a useful idiot to earn pocket change to allow yourself to be manipulated.

 

[sbfuncle]

Ironically, her Twitter profile stated that she was a life coach. And yet she chose to off herself.

Whoever her clients were, it's probably too late to seek refunds now.

She got the tiger Huang vibe

 

[k1976]

Follow Shan's way of criticism is safest..LOL...:

https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/criticise-a-minister-but-dont-sling-m&d-shanmugam

Responding to law students' questions about Singapore laws and their impact on free speech at a dialogue organised by students from the National University of Singapore Faculty of Law, Mr Shanmugam signalled that the Government was not about to soften its stance on defamation laws, even as he said the laws do not curtail political discussion.

Defamation laws, he said, are not there to stop people from criticising the Government, but exist to protect personal reputations.

"If you make a personal allegation of fact, if you say I took money, I am corrupt, I will then sue you and ask you to prove it. But if you say I am a stupid fool who doesn't know what I'm talking about, and the Government comprises ministers who don't know what they're talking about and you criticise every policy of the Government, no one can sue you," he said.

"By all means challenge my competence, by all means challenge my policies, by all means put forward alternate policies. By all means argue it, no problem. That's not defamation."

For public debate to be honest and meaningful, he added, political discussions should not descend into mudslinging.

------------------
Source

What we say must be based on a Fact, not suka suka remarks offline / online - it is getting more serious as people can pull in legal wars for what they might say in a wrong state of mind, and end up losing $$$$$$ or even worst committed suicide.

This Game is strictly Not for Pigeon Hole Hardlanders 諸葛亮.

This also show the need to respect others and tolerate different opinions.

 

[MaximiLian]

 

[batman1]

What we say must be based on a Fact, not suka suka remarks offline / online - it is getting more serious as people can pull in legal wars for what they might say in a wrong state of mind, and end up losing $$$$$$ or even worst committed suicide.

This Game is strictly Not for Pigeon Hole Hardlanders 諸葛亮.

This also show the need to respect others and tolerate different opinions.

Most probably she is suffering from depression.Many people kenna sued by PAP but they did not commit suicide,they just soldier on to fight for their rights and ideals. 555

 

[shiokalingam]

 

[Hightech88]

Link

 

[k1976]

Most probably she is suffering from depression.Many people kenna sued by PAP but they did not commit suicide,they just soldier on to fight for their rights and ideals. 555

War of The Gods
Mortals pls siam