Mr. Shanmugam claims that all who asked others to take the rap for speeding offences are given fines as standard punishment for such a minor transgression as perverting the course of justice. For that, he used a few cases as examples without providing comprehensive statistics such as “in year 20XX, there were 1,000 such instances of perverting the course of justice and 980 of them resulted in custodial sentences whereas 20 were given fines because of mitigating circumstances”.
Meanwhile, peasants on the Little Red Dot are kept in the dark by their trusted daily, the Shit Times, about a similar case which is playing out in London. The sentence, just meted out yesterday, is EIGHT MONTHS. Yes, months and not weeks or days. Reuters reported that:
“Disgraced former British energy minister Chris Huhne was jailed for eight months on Monday for lying to police about a speeding offence in a bizarre tale of adultery and revenge that gripped the British public.
Huhne’s ex-wife Vicky Pryce, a prominent economist, also was jailed for eight months for her role in the deception.
Prior to the scandal, Huhne, 58, had been seen as a potential leader of the Liberal Democrats, junior partners of the Conservatives in Britain’s ruling coalition government.
The pair falsely informed police that Vicky Pryce was driving Huhne’s car when it was caught by a speed camera, so that he could avoid a driving ban.
The incident remained a family secret for years but came back to haunt Huhne after he left Pryce for his mistress, Carina Trimingham, in 2010. Pryce told two newspapers about the 2003 deception in an act of revenge that landed both Huhne and herself in the dock.”
For more on the sordid details of this scandal, please see: http://www.scmp.com/news/world/arti...huhne-ex-wife-jailed-over-speeding-ticket-lie
Hats off to the Brits. They have shown us what is meant by “All are equal in the eyes of the law”.
Meanwhile, on the Little Red Dot, not only did the surgeon with the Doggie name not get the customary custodial sentence, he had not been disciplined by the Singapore Medical Council.
Under Section 53 of the Medical Registration Act, where a registered medical practitioner is found by a Disciplinary Tribunal:
(a) to have been convicted in Singapore or elsewhere of an offence involving fraud or dishonesty;
(b) to have been convicted in Singapore or elsewhere of any offence implying a defect in character which makes him unfit for his profession; or
(c) to have been guilty of such improper act or conduct which, in the opinion of the Disciplinary Tribunal, brings disrepute to his profession
the Disciplinary Tribunal may, among other things, remove him from the register of medical practitioners or suspend him for a period of not less than 3 months and not more than 3 years.
Asking someone else to take the rap for you for a criminal offence is dishonest. It definitely implies a defect in character which makes him unfit for his profession. The defect being a tendency to engage in cover ups. What if he made a mistake while doing one of his “Nips and Tucks”? And with all this publicity, it has ALREADY brought his profession into disrepute.
Knock, knock, Singapore Medical Council, are you sleeping on the job? Knock, knock, Mister Shanmugam, why are you afraid to give us the complete statistics as opposed to a bunch of hand-picked cases? Is it not stated in Article 12 of our Constitution, the highest law in the land, that: “All persons are equal before the law and entitled to the equal protection of the law”? 掛羊头卖牛肉 is indeed a PAP specialty, perhaps that is why this Minister would rather focus on a minor case of a street vendor passing off beef as mutton than concentrate on his real portfolio – law and justice.
Rumpole of the Bailey
* Rumpole is the main character in a British TV series about an ageing London barrister who defends any and all clients (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rumpole_of_the_Bailey for more info). The author, who is an NUS law grad living and working abroad, chose this moniker to encourage an interest in legal issues because it does not just affect lawyers and their clients. The everyday layman needs to be informed of his rights and obligations and in the context of the “Little Red Dot” to avoid being talked down to or misled by their highly paid Ministers, including those that don’t have any portfolio, or civil servants with bad attitude and poor knowledge of the laws which they are supposed to be enforcing.
Meanwhile, peasants on the Little Red Dot are kept in the dark by their trusted daily, the Shit Times, about a similar case which is playing out in London. The sentence, just meted out yesterday, is EIGHT MONTHS. Yes, months and not weeks or days. Reuters reported that:
“Disgraced former British energy minister Chris Huhne was jailed for eight months on Monday for lying to police about a speeding offence in a bizarre tale of adultery and revenge that gripped the British public.
Huhne’s ex-wife Vicky Pryce, a prominent economist, also was jailed for eight months for her role in the deception.
Prior to the scandal, Huhne, 58, had been seen as a potential leader of the Liberal Democrats, junior partners of the Conservatives in Britain’s ruling coalition government.
The pair falsely informed police that Vicky Pryce was driving Huhne’s car when it was caught by a speed camera, so that he could avoid a driving ban.
The incident remained a family secret for years but came back to haunt Huhne after he left Pryce for his mistress, Carina Trimingham, in 2010. Pryce told two newspapers about the 2003 deception in an act of revenge that landed both Huhne and herself in the dock.”
For more on the sordid details of this scandal, please see: http://www.scmp.com/news/world/arti...huhne-ex-wife-jailed-over-speeding-ticket-lie
Hats off to the Brits. They have shown us what is meant by “All are equal in the eyes of the law”.
Meanwhile, on the Little Red Dot, not only did the surgeon with the Doggie name not get the customary custodial sentence, he had not been disciplined by the Singapore Medical Council.
Under Section 53 of the Medical Registration Act, where a registered medical practitioner is found by a Disciplinary Tribunal:
(a) to have been convicted in Singapore or elsewhere of an offence involving fraud or dishonesty;
(b) to have been convicted in Singapore or elsewhere of any offence implying a defect in character which makes him unfit for his profession; or
(c) to have been guilty of such improper act or conduct which, in the opinion of the Disciplinary Tribunal, brings disrepute to his profession
the Disciplinary Tribunal may, among other things, remove him from the register of medical practitioners or suspend him for a period of not less than 3 months and not more than 3 years.
Asking someone else to take the rap for you for a criminal offence is dishonest. It definitely implies a defect in character which makes him unfit for his profession. The defect being a tendency to engage in cover ups. What if he made a mistake while doing one of his “Nips and Tucks”? And with all this publicity, it has ALREADY brought his profession into disrepute.
Knock, knock, Singapore Medical Council, are you sleeping on the job? Knock, knock, Mister Shanmugam, why are you afraid to give us the complete statistics as opposed to a bunch of hand-picked cases? Is it not stated in Article 12 of our Constitution, the highest law in the land, that: “All persons are equal before the law and entitled to the equal protection of the law”? 掛羊头卖牛肉 is indeed a PAP specialty, perhaps that is why this Minister would rather focus on a minor case of a street vendor passing off beef as mutton than concentrate on his real portfolio – law and justice.
Rumpole of the Bailey
* Rumpole is the main character in a British TV series about an ageing London barrister who defends any and all clients (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rumpole_of_the_Bailey for more info). The author, who is an NUS law grad living and working abroad, chose this moniker to encourage an interest in legal issues because it does not just affect lawyers and their clients. The everyday layman needs to be informed of his rights and obligations and in the context of the “Little Red Dot” to avoid being talked down to or misled by their highly paid Ministers, including those that don’t have any portfolio, or civil servants with bad attitude and poor knowledge of the laws which they are supposed to be enforcing.
Last edited:
