For advertisement

Sample

7/22/2012

The Ravi Incident – Another twist



The story so far, Dr Calvin Fones and lawyer Wong Siew Hong have been perceived as the villains of this case, out to do M Ravi in. Every one in favour of Ravi seems to think so. The psychiatrist is seen to have breached his professional code to disclose Ravi’s medical report to the Law Society without Ravi’s consent. Ravi claimed to have seen him for 10 mins on his stress problem and Fones offered to write him a MC but turned down by Ravi who did not feel the need for it. Still a medical report was submitted to the Law Society.

In Wong’s case, it was his barging into the High Court on two occasions in a single day, without ‘any locus to be there’, that were raising eyebrows. His strange actions could be seen as contempt of court and was duly told off by the judges. While everyone thought he acted in the capacity of the Law Society but with the Society claiming not so, it is now a case of acting on his own, on his own volition. This is hair raising.

Apparently both are not on Ravi’s side. However, Uncle Yap in his latest video tape has clarified that Fones was actually on their side, a friend of Uncle Yap and has been helping the WP and Ravi all the while. This would now cast more questions as to why he wrote the medical report which Ravi did not asked for. This point was clarified in the media in that he was asked by Wong to write the report for him on Monday morning, 16 Jul. Thus he did not write any report until told to do so by Wong.

According to Uncle Yap, Fones was required under some terms as Ravi’s doctor to submit report to the LSS. On this point he is cleared. As to who disclosed the confidential report, it is also clear that Wong brought it to the court. Would this constitute a disclosure or a public disclosure and a breach of confidentially? Or was it K Jeyaratnam as there were some comments that he was the one and retracted it later.

If Fones was on Ravi’s side, I think Ravi did not sue him, then he is being dragged into the shit hole by someone to discredit him. If he is not on Ravi’s side, he is also being dragged into the shit hole just the same. Either or, he is dead meat.

What is puzzling is that Fones, other than the very damaging report that Ravi is unfit to practise as a lawyer, he was attributed to have said that the Mental Health Act may have to be imposed to lock Ravi in IMH. This threat is not a friendly one and if he is on Ravi’s side it was unnecessary for him to mention that. Or did someone put the words in his mouth on this?

Though Ravi did not sue him, he still filed a complaint to the Singapore Medical Association against Fones. This did not necessary mean that Ravi is pulling Fones down. It could the necessary step to initiate a hearing to allow the truth to be aired in an official inquiry. Where does Fones really stand, a neutral professional, or on the side of either party?


Lawyer Wong’s case is clearer I think. And that is why the LSS is also distancing itself from him though LSS agreed with his civic minded act as reported. Both Wong and the LSS are being sued by Ravi.

The truth and apparent truth are still very patchy and more twists and turns are likely to surface and no one can presume who is the devil or real devil at this point in time.

15 comments:

Matilah_Singapura said...

Here is my take:

1. The guy has a medical condition that can affect his intellectual capacity and judgement. The nature of his profession requires the constant use of deep intellectual processes and cautious judgement. Therefore because he is IMPAIRED by his medical condition, he should not practice without some sort of over sight or supervision.

2. The way this whole thing is being handled is one big UNNECESSARY mess.

Anonymous said...

Which guy has a medical condition, Ravi, Wong or Fones?

Anonymous said...

Talking about mental medical condition.

What is the difference between bipolar and senile?

Anonymous said...

When in doubt,
just vote Opposition.
Can't go wrong with this decision.

Anonymous said...

It is possible that around 60-70% of our citizens have a medical condition that can affect their intellectual capacity and judgement.
see for yourself.

Anonymous said...

It is as clear as day light now that lawyer Mr Wong has a medical condition that can affect his intellectual capacity and judgement. The nature of his profession requires the constant use of deep intellectual processes and cautious judgement. Therefore because he is IMPAIRED by his medical condition, he should not practice without some sort of over sight or supervision.

JayF said...

"http://sg.news.yahoo.com/lawyer-m-ravi-in-bizarre-tirade-at-speaker%E2%80%99s-corner.html"

Guess Mr Wong and Dr Fones WERE indeed trying to cover their own ass. Background checks reveal Mr Wong to be on the subcomitte for member welfare and Dr Fones to be Ravi's designated physician.

They'd be irresponsible if they did not act on what they knew about Ravi's mental state, but looks like Ravi just proved Dr Fone's diagnosis.

Jalan Kayu 369? Seriously?

Anonymous said...

From what he wrote and commented, Fones is not on the side of Ravi no matter what Yap had said.

Anonymous said...

Think both Fones and Wong are on the side of Ravi. The way they went about fumbling and bungling like trying to do Ravi in was actually doing their masters in. It puts their masters in a very bad light and with no where to hide. Ingenious intrigue.

Anonymous said...

Whatever it is,
just thank the Two Men.
They are doing Singaporeans
a great favour.
At least they provide us some
dramas and the fun side of Sin.

Ghost said...

It doesn't matter if they are on Mr. Ravi's side or not. Mr. Ravi must be informed first before they went barging into court to stop the case. Both Dr. Fones & Mr. Wong are deep in trouble because what they did are not right. It's as simple as that.

Anonymous said...

We would know on who side the govt is in the way the two 'culprits' are 'disciplined!

Anonymous said...

Is this a legal issue, ethical issue or political issue?

Anonymous said...

It is a survival issue, as the issue may cause the downfall of a person and or a state.

Anonymous said...

Ravi's visit to the psychiatrist was only 10 and nothing serious was diagnosed. That's why psychiatrist's offer of a MC was turned down. If nothing serious, why needed to call lawyer?

If serious why not tell Ravi and why took only 10 min?

Why wrote a report after told by lawyer on a Monday morning to rush to court?