Below is a letter posted in 3in1kopitiam blog. I am not sure if this is true and if found untrue I will remove it immediately. I just felt that I am seeing a child being raped in broad daylight. And I hope this is not true. It must not happen in my country, when a little girl of 11 is being handcuffed for a petty crime.
My 11 year old daughter was arrested and handcuffed for 2 hours today.
Dear all,
I, a Singapore born and raised Chinese citizen would like to apologise to the Singapore Government and all tax paying fellow citizens for my failure to teach my children enough about the folly of stealing
I am a night shift worker so I sleep in the day.
At 5 pm today, I woke up and discovered my younger 11 year old daughter missing. I asked the older 13 year girl but got evasive answers. After a half hour later, I panicked and called the Police. Ten minutes after the call, they called back to inform me that my daughter had been arrested for shoplifting at a Guardian Pharmacy store and that I have to bring the elder along as well to the NPC as she was involved. My queries for answers as to the circumstances under which she was arrested were curtly declined.
When I reached the NPC, I was horrified to see my daughter slumped over a table sleeping with her right hand cuffed to a railing on the wall. Sitting opposite her and typing a statement into the computer was a female uniformed Malay officer. I ascertained later she was one of two Malay arresting officers. Having been an SC before, I understand police procedures but had never seen the lack of discretion when it comes to minors as I was witnessing in my daughter's case. That female Malay officer made no eye contact with me at all for the entire duration I was in the station. Not even when she in the report room where I was.
I vented my anger at the officers present about the necessity of handcuffing my daughter leaving her in such a torturous physical position to endure despite the fact that she was already in Police custody. I told them that as a minor, she is not going to be charged for her first offence. What purpose does it serve with regard to procedural safety? That she will snatch their revolvers and turn it against them? Why subject her to the same treatment for adults committing more serious crimes?
A Malay SSSgt led me into an adjoining interview room and gave me a summary account of my daughter's arrest. He told me he will get my elder daughter's statement expedited so that we can go home as soon as possible.
I went outside for a smoke to help calm myself down before returning. I saw then that the handcuffs on my daughter were removed. She was released for her elder sister's turn to be interviewed and for a police statement to be made. I checked her wrists and discovered abrasions on both her wrists and a contact burn mark in one. I took photographs on the spot. Earlier on, I had taken a photo while she was handcuffed to the wall railing. I want to have it printed, framed and mounted in our home so that they will never forget this episode.
I was allowed to bring my younger daughter out for a quick dinner. When we returned the elder daughter had just finished her statement. She was not handcuffed. We left the NPC after I had signed both their bail bonds. We have to return to the Police Div HQ at a later date.
I took my daughter to a hospital emergency department to have her wounds attended.
Back home, I interrogated my children and found that it was the elder sister who has a compulsive obsession with makeup products, instigated the younger to pilfer that $11.90 pair of lipstick. My younger daughter has a timid temperament and is very vulnerable to suggestions. She is still undergoing counselling in school after she slashed herself from elbow to wrist not too long ago when she was ten years old after constant bullying in school.
When they were spotted they ran and escaped but the younger, out of a sense of guilt returned to surrender the stolen item to the Malay shop assistant who detained her and called the Police.
I share this story with all because I fervently hope that parents will not have to undergo the same turmoil in my heart that I feel now and that they will use my children as an example on the consequences of stealing and getting caught eventually.
Once again, let me express the deep remorse I feel for the shame I had brought to the Singaporean Chinese community through my less than adequate nurturing of my children's absorption of good moral values.
I also like to thank the Malay shop assistant who detained my child when she tried to return the stolen item and Guardian Pharmacy's strict non-negotiable policy to deter shoplifting and the teaching of a good lesson.
Lastly, I would like to thank the Singapore Police Force and the Government for the benefit of the experience my child had gone through, that benevolence which I hope my child would repay with interest when she grows up into adulthood. She don't have a passport, she can't flee the country and not return. So please do not worry.
Peace be upon all.
3/04/2012
Abusing the legal system
The hyenas went to court. In a corner sat an old ox, alone. The door swung open, a pack of hyenas strutted in, led by two burly lawyers. It was like an entourage of mafias in all its grandeur.
‘Your honour, I have suffered tremendous stress and sleepless nights because of the old ox. He had intimidated me, threatened to trample upon me. I have been living in fear of him. My life is a misery.’ The hyena told the judge. And mama hyena gave the young hyena a motherly hug, saying, ‘My poor innocent child.’ And the rest of the hyenas yelled, ‘Bad ox, bad ox!’
Then one burly lawyer stood up slowly. He gave the lonely old ox a cold stare. He turned to the judge and spoke in a cold measured tone. ‘Your honour, the ox had been intimidating my client for a very long time. I am submitting two summons against him for criminal intimidation and causing duress to my client.’
After reviewing the summons the judge told the lawyer to tell his client that it was a minor case and the client might want to find an alternative way to resolve the matter with the ox. The hyena jumped up, ‘No way, the ox had made me suffered, threatened to beat me, to trample on me, to kick me. I cannot accept anything. I want to sue the ox.’ The lawyer nodded and told the court this was the position of his client. The hyena wanted blood. The client would not consider any other options.
The judge ordered the lawyer to discuss the matter with his client one more time and the court would resume after a break. When they returned, the ox was still sitting in his corner, feeling very intimidated by the pack of hyenas and the condescending glare of the lawyers. The lawyer turned to the court and firmly announced that his client insisted that the matter must be settled in court. ‘My client would pay all legal cost to see the ox behind bars. And we will be framing more charges against the ox, like being too slow and obstructing my client on the road….the ox is a public nuisance.’
The judge repeated by asking if that was the final position of his hyena client. The lawyer confidently said it was. The judge pondered for a moment and then said. “This is a small matter and going to court would not in anyway solve the problem. The court has many more important cases to handle and would not be appropriate to use its resources to attend to such a case. The case is hereby dismissed.’
The hyenas jumped to their feet and screamed their disapproval. They did not know that they had hit the wall of justice. They did not know that the court would not be abused to execute their law of the jungle. The two burly lawyers were equally shocked that their meticulously crafted summons were thrown out by the court. They stood there looking sheepish in front of the pack of hyenas.
The judge told the old ox who was sitting there silently throughout the session that he could go home. Outside the court, the sun smiled at the old ox. The court of law stood firm and would not bow to the law of the jungle. The instruments of the law were there to serve justice and not to be abused by the rich, the powerful and the ugly. Every element of the legal system, from the judge to the legal counsels, was part and parcel of the legal system, to see to it that justice is carried out and not abused. The guardians of the court of law must be seen to be protecting justice and not to abuse the law for their private agenda.
The hyenas left the court feeling very sore and angry that they could not use the court of law to settle their personal vendetta against the ox.
‘Your honour, I have suffered tremendous stress and sleepless nights because of the old ox. He had intimidated me, threatened to trample upon me. I have been living in fear of him. My life is a misery.’ The hyena told the judge. And mama hyena gave the young hyena a motherly hug, saying, ‘My poor innocent child.’ And the rest of the hyenas yelled, ‘Bad ox, bad ox!’
Then one burly lawyer stood up slowly. He gave the lonely old ox a cold stare. He turned to the judge and spoke in a cold measured tone. ‘Your honour, the ox had been intimidating my client for a very long time. I am submitting two summons against him for criminal intimidation and causing duress to my client.’
After reviewing the summons the judge told the lawyer to tell his client that it was a minor case and the client might want to find an alternative way to resolve the matter with the ox. The hyena jumped up, ‘No way, the ox had made me suffered, threatened to beat me, to trample on me, to kick me. I cannot accept anything. I want to sue the ox.’ The lawyer nodded and told the court this was the position of his client. The hyena wanted blood. The client would not consider any other options.
The judge ordered the lawyer to discuss the matter with his client one more time and the court would resume after a break. When they returned, the ox was still sitting in his corner, feeling very intimidated by the pack of hyenas and the condescending glare of the lawyers. The lawyer turned to the court and firmly announced that his client insisted that the matter must be settled in court. ‘My client would pay all legal cost to see the ox behind bars. And we will be framing more charges against the ox, like being too slow and obstructing my client on the road….the ox is a public nuisance.’
The judge repeated by asking if that was the final position of his hyena client. The lawyer confidently said it was. The judge pondered for a moment and then said. “This is a small matter and going to court would not in anyway solve the problem. The court has many more important cases to handle and would not be appropriate to use its resources to attend to such a case. The case is hereby dismissed.’
The hyenas jumped to their feet and screamed their disapproval. They did not know that they had hit the wall of justice. They did not know that the court would not be abused to execute their law of the jungle. The two burly lawyers were equally shocked that their meticulously crafted summons were thrown out by the court. They stood there looking sheepish in front of the pack of hyenas.
The judge told the old ox who was sitting there silently throughout the session that he could go home. Outside the court, the sun smiled at the old ox. The court of law stood firm and would not bow to the law of the jungle. The instruments of the law were there to serve justice and not to be abused by the rich, the powerful and the ugly. Every element of the legal system, from the judge to the legal counsels, was part and parcel of the legal system, to see to it that justice is carried out and not abused. The guardians of the court of law must be seen to be protecting justice and not to abuse the law for their private agenda.
The hyenas left the court feeling very sore and angry that they could not use the court of law to settle their personal vendetta against the ox.
3/03/2012
The Singapore People’s Subsidy (SPS)
Has anyone heard of this SPS? The people have been bombarded with govt subsidies everyday that they are either going bonkers or numbed. If you read the number of subsidies that the govt is giving to the Singaporeans, the govt will be bankrupt long time ago. The latest is something like $60k for a 2rm flat that costs $90k. Wow, wow, how can be so much. Where is the money coming from? There university fees, $20k but pays $6k, and what else…? I am also thinking of giving subsidies to the people, cheap rice at $20 per kilo. My cost is $100. Please queue up.
Not to be distracted, what is this SPS? This is the Singapore People’s Subsidy to the Govt in the tune of hundreds of billions. The Govt calls it national reserves. Should it be called the people’s money or savings? How does this money become the national reserves? Or are they really two different things?
Have the citizens been subsidising the Govt in the tune of hundreds of billions through the CPF? Maybe not. Dunno where the CPF money is or with who. I have read that the two national sovereign funds did not borrow from the CPF. They something like borrowed from dunno where. But somewhere somehow, they got the money. Anyway, the Govt has a lot of money to set up big investment funds to pay huge salaries to big time investment managers to invest the money and make more money to pay themselves in big bonuses. How I wish I can be appointed as a director, no need to be Chairman.
Is there any linkage between the money of the two sovereign funds and the CPF money or the people’s money? If there is…, something like A lends to B and B lends to C and C lends to D, so legally, technically, D only borrows from C and got nothing to do with A. So A cannot claim that his money is now subsidising D.
But where is A’s money if it is not subsidising someone? And what is A getting in return? 2.5% or 4% interests that could easily be wiped out by inflation. Further, A cannot touch the money for a very very long time. Some may never in their lives.
This is the Singapore People’s Subsidy to the Govt. And this is real money, no mark up to mark down. Maybe I am wrong. Where got the people subsidising the Govt? I am talking rubbish.
Not to be distracted, what is this SPS? This is the Singapore People’s Subsidy to the Govt in the tune of hundreds of billions. The Govt calls it national reserves. Should it be called the people’s money or savings? How does this money become the national reserves? Or are they really two different things?
Have the citizens been subsidising the Govt in the tune of hundreds of billions through the CPF? Maybe not. Dunno where the CPF money is or with who. I have read that the two national sovereign funds did not borrow from the CPF. They something like borrowed from dunno where. But somewhere somehow, they got the money. Anyway, the Govt has a lot of money to set up big investment funds to pay huge salaries to big time investment managers to invest the money and make more money to pay themselves in big bonuses. How I wish I can be appointed as a director, no need to be Chairman.
Is there any linkage between the money of the two sovereign funds and the CPF money or the people’s money? If there is…, something like A lends to B and B lends to C and C lends to D, so legally, technically, D only borrows from C and got nothing to do with A. So A cannot claim that his money is now subsidising D.
But where is A’s money if it is not subsidising someone? And what is A getting in return? 2.5% or 4% interests that could easily be wiped out by inflation. Further, A cannot touch the money for a very very long time. Some may never in their lives.
This is the Singapore People’s Subsidy to the Govt. And this is real money, no mark up to mark down. Maybe I am wrong. Where got the people subsidising the Govt? I am talking rubbish.
3/02/2012
$1000 income can buy a flat!
The logic of $1000 income can buy a flat is the same as $8 for an open heart surgery. But don’t laugh, it is true, it can be done. How, I dunno. But it is uttered in Parliament so must be a fact. It’s elementary, Watson!
I have known a young couple whose combined income is about $14k and with a couple of hundred thousands in savings. They will not be coming home. They could not afford to buy a private flat as it would mean emptying everything they have saved. And that is not all, still got to take nearly a million dollar mortgage.
Only fools will think of taking a million dollar mortgage and think it is alright. Or maybe a gambler will do that as there is always the hope of making more money as the value will appreciate, surely. And then sell it to buy a more expensive flat and take another bigger loan and keep snowballing the winnings.
The young couple will not be qualified for HDB flats for sure. So they must be sent to the private property market as cannon fodders to feed the developers. This is how merciless this govt has become in its housing policy and everyday pretending to ask why the Sinkies are not coming back home or moving out instead.
They are telling the highly qualified young that if they want to come back, prepare to pay a million bucks ransom first. And if the young want a bit more comfort in owning a car, another $100k at least for a cheap car. They think the young are so stupid to return home to be suckered? When they have been abroad and knowing what one million bucks can provide them, who the shit would want to come home to settle into a mickey mouse flat for the same sum, and reservist liabilities to add on?
But for less qualified professionals like FTs who would not be above the $12k income ceiling, it is okay. Convert to pink IC and buy a relatively cheaper HDB flat which the better qualified Sinkies would not be allowed to buy and no NS or reservist liabilities. Bid the time, let the property price go up and sell it to another suckered Sinkie that is not allowed to buy from the HDB direct and get out of here.
This kind of policy is so brilliant that it hurts the eyes.
I have known a young couple whose combined income is about $14k and with a couple of hundred thousands in savings. They will not be coming home. They could not afford to buy a private flat as it would mean emptying everything they have saved. And that is not all, still got to take nearly a million dollar mortgage.
Only fools will think of taking a million dollar mortgage and think it is alright. Or maybe a gambler will do that as there is always the hope of making more money as the value will appreciate, surely. And then sell it to buy a more expensive flat and take another bigger loan and keep snowballing the winnings.
The young couple will not be qualified for HDB flats for sure. So they must be sent to the private property market as cannon fodders to feed the developers. This is how merciless this govt has become in its housing policy and everyday pretending to ask why the Sinkies are not coming back home or moving out instead.
They are telling the highly qualified young that if they want to come back, prepare to pay a million bucks ransom first. And if the young want a bit more comfort in owning a car, another $100k at least for a cheap car. They think the young are so stupid to return home to be suckered? When they have been abroad and knowing what one million bucks can provide them, who the shit would want to come home to settle into a mickey mouse flat for the same sum, and reservist liabilities to add on?
But for less qualified professionals like FTs who would not be above the $12k income ceiling, it is okay. Convert to pink IC and buy a relatively cheaper HDB flat which the better qualified Sinkies would not be allowed to buy and no NS or reservist liabilities. Bid the time, let the property price go up and sell it to another suckered Sinkie that is not allowed to buy from the HDB direct and get out of here.
This kind of policy is so brilliant that it hurts the eyes.
CPF – Any sense of guilt or shame?
It is a startling fact that no MPs, to my recollection, ever spoke about the wrong and harm done to Singaporeans when their hard earned savings are being kept away from them. Yes it is legal, the govt passed laws in Parliament to help the people to have money when they are in their 80s and 90s, and plenty of money. While many are savings for their 80s and 90s when money is no longer relevant, when waiting to die is the reality, many are dying in their 60s and 70s and got no chance to enjoy a little of their life savings. This is so humane and so caring. Or is it?
Incidentally, which part of the CPF schemes, the minimum sum in Ordinary Account and Medisave Accounts were passed by Parliament? I believe the power to keep the people’s money in the CPF and the continuous increases in the minimum sums must be sanctioned by Parliament and cannot be left to the discretion of a stats board to decide.
Is there an MP who is pricked by his conscience that the CPF policy on keeping people’s money away from them when they needed it most dares to speak out against it? Or can it be concluded that all the MPs also believe that this is right, the right thing to do and they support it? If they really believe so, then obviously their conscience will not be hurt and neither should anyone of them feel any guilt about taking the poor and average Sinkies money so that others can go and invest and make big monies to pay themselves big salaries and big bonuses while on the other hand the poor helpless Sinkies are gasping for air and sinking into a life of oblivion.
The conclusion is clear, any MP that does not speak against the obnoxious shifting goal posts and the outrageously high minimum sum to be tucked away and away from their owners’ reach are accomplices to this policy. And the poor Sinkies who suffered because of it must be thankful to them for being able to leave behind a big largesse on their demise from this realm of existence.
Where got guilt? Where got conscience? Where got shame? It is all legal and good for the people. And the people are so ungrateful and complaining everyday when the super talents spent so much time and effort devising schemes to help them keep their money safely in the CPF. Shouldn’t they be happy and thankful?
Incidentally, which part of the CPF schemes, the minimum sum in Ordinary Account and Medisave Accounts were passed by Parliament? I believe the power to keep the people’s money in the CPF and the continuous increases in the minimum sums must be sanctioned by Parliament and cannot be left to the discretion of a stats board to decide.
Is there an MP who is pricked by his conscience that the CPF policy on keeping people’s money away from them when they needed it most dares to speak out against it? Or can it be concluded that all the MPs also believe that this is right, the right thing to do and they support it? If they really believe so, then obviously their conscience will not be hurt and neither should anyone of them feel any guilt about taking the poor and average Sinkies money so that others can go and invest and make big monies to pay themselves big salaries and big bonuses while on the other hand the poor helpless Sinkies are gasping for air and sinking into a life of oblivion.
The conclusion is clear, any MP that does not speak against the obnoxious shifting goal posts and the outrageously high minimum sum to be tucked away and away from their owners’ reach are accomplices to this policy. And the poor Sinkies who suffered because of it must be thankful to them for being able to leave behind a big largesse on their demise from this realm of existence.
Where got guilt? Where got conscience? Where got shame? It is all legal and good for the people. And the people are so ungrateful and complaining everyday when the super talents spent so much time and effort devising schemes to help them keep their money safely in the CPF. Shouldn’t they be happy and thankful?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)