Could be steffychun's gay partner
Why aren't you protesting instead of insulting people?
Oh yeah, you are just like Amos. Get free chocolate and call it raping the cow.
-
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
Breaking News: Amos Yee is World's Youngest Prisoner of Conscience
- Thread starter Leepotism
- Start date
Why aren't you protesting instead of insulting people?
Oh yeah, you are just like Amos. Get free chocolate and call it raping the cow.
Last check, Amos's mother Mary has removed her Facebook account.
Source: All Singapore Stuff (ASS)
AMOS YEE'S MOTHER: AMOS IS TALKING TO HIMSELF & HALLUCINATING IN PRISON
Submitted by farhan on Thu, 18/06/2015 - 6:13pm
Ever since Amos Yee was forced into 3 weeks remand, there has been little news about his condition apart from the revelations by his lawyer Alfred Dodwell who has since been censored for publishing court documents.
A reader alerted us to Amos's mothers Facebook which clearly shows the ill-effects of prison life taking its toll on Amos's mental health.
Amos's mother Mary said:
"Amos' cellmates told him that he could be suffering from hallucinations. He was seen talking to himself and hitting the walls repeatedly. He became worried as he could not remember any such things done. He also has difficulty falling asleep, having only about 2 to 3 hrs of sleep everyday.
Amos looks even skinnier today. He said pimples have grown on his body and made him feel itchy. When I told him that Dodwell & TOC were told to remove the 'Firm Letter to Court', he kept asking, "Why? Why remove?" At one point, he hit repeatedly on the glass piece separating us apart so hard that it invited 3 police officers over."
It appears that Amos is not coping well with prison and may be suffering from a mental breakdown. Is this how Singapore treats our 16 year olds? What do you think? Does Amos deserve such harsh and draconian treatment?
Excerpt from an archived copy of The Online Citizen's article, "Inappropriate to even consider RTC for Amos Yee: Teen’s lawyer"
Click here to view Dodwell's letter.
Source: All Singapore Stuff (ASS)
AMOS YEE'S MOTHER: AMOS IS TALKING TO HIMSELF & HALLUCINATING IN PRISON
Submitted by farhan on Thu, 18/06/2015 - 6:13pm
Ever since Amos Yee was forced into 3 weeks remand, there has been little news about his condition apart from the revelations by his lawyer Alfred Dodwell who has since been censored for publishing court documents.
A reader alerted us to Amos's mothers Facebook which clearly shows the ill-effects of prison life taking its toll on Amos's mental health.
Amos's mother Mary said:
"Amos' cellmates told him that he could be suffering from hallucinations. He was seen talking to himself and hitting the walls repeatedly. He became worried as he could not remember any such things done. He also has difficulty falling asleep, having only about 2 to 3 hrs of sleep everyday.
Amos looks even skinnier today. He said pimples have grown on his body and made him feel itchy. When I told him that Dodwell & TOC were told to remove the 'Firm Letter to Court', he kept asking, "Why? Why remove?" At one point, he hit repeatedly on the glass piece separating us apart so hard that it invited 3 police officers over."
It appears that Amos is not coping well with prison and may be suffering from a mental breakdown. Is this how Singapore treats our 16 year olds? What do you think? Does Amos deserve such harsh and draconian treatment?
End of Article
Excerpt from an archived copy of The Online Citizen's article, "Inappropriate to even consider RTC for Amos Yee: Teen’s lawyer"
Mr Dodwell also criticised the suitability of evidence brought before the court for the consideration of Yee’s RTC sentencing.
“We would state that any events post-12 May 2015 should not be brought to the attention of the Judge if it has nothing to do with the offence in question,” wrote Mr Dodwell.
“To allow for the continuous receipt of evidence and Affidavits would mean there is no end to the amount of damage that is sought to be piled on Amos. With respect, Amos cannot be tried and re-tried on the pretext of his offending postings with unrelated postings, his views on the charge, and his views on the case.”
Mr Dodwell charged that “all of this highly prejudicial material has been placed before the Judge to seek to color her mind, influencing the court against taking a decision to give Amos the lightest possible sentence and now even ordering that Amos be placed on remand for RTC consideration.”
To put Yee’s behaviour since 12 May to 2 June would hence be “wholly unfair and unjust on Amos to be under scrutiny merely because he has chosen, unlike others, to put his views and thoughts in his personal blog.”
Mr Dodwell said that “it is our contention that the whole trial-sentencing process has been tainted” as a result of the “irrelevant and highly prejudicial material placed before the Judge”.
He also noted that the prosecution had stated at the hearing on 2 June 2015 that fresh charges might be levied against Amos for his refusal to take down the offending postings.
“If that is so, why is it now placed before the Judge?” he wrote. “So, is Amos to be punished twice for this same matter of his refusal to take down his postings? The muddling of matters is extremely prejudicial to Amos.”
Mr Dodwell also called into question the effectiveness of an RTC sentence should it comes to pass, and indicated that doing so might impinge on his rights to free speech under Article 14 of the Singapore Constitution, as he has not been found guilty for all the posts that are now under consideration for his sentencing.
Mr Dodwell also highlighted the poor treatment that Yee has been subject to while in remand at Changi Prison.
Yee was apparently not given access to the legal documents that Mr Dodwell had prepared for him and put in the care of the prison officers with strict instructions for them to be given to Yee.
He also noted the treatment that Yee was subject to that left him in “a state of depression and having severe suicidal thoughts” which was aggravated by his time spent in remand. He then told the prison officer that he was feeling suicidal.
“Regrettably, as a result of what Amos shared, Amos was taken to the prison medical facility and strapped to a bed in a medical facility for approximately one and a half days. This episode aggravated Amos’s suicidal thoughts. He was restrained with one of his hands and one of his legs strapped to the bed. Amos informed us that he could only sit up or lie down. He found it extremely difficult to urinate and defecate. He was expected to urinate into a jar at the side of the bed, which would be left there after he does so notwithstanding the pungent odors which would emanate. He had to bend down painfully against his straps in order to do so. In the said medical ward, Amos was surrounded by patients who were mentally unsound. One patient was constantly jerking against his chains and another one would talk to himself and be unresponsive to other people. Furthermore, the lights were never switched off throughout the day and was glaring into our client’s eyes such that he could hardly have any restful sleep.”
In view of this, and considering Yee’s age and time already spent in remand, Mr Dodwell proposed that an RTC sentence would be inappropriate, and for the hearing date to be brought forward.
“We would state that any events post-12 May 2015 should not be brought to the attention of the Judge if it has nothing to do with the offence in question,” wrote Mr Dodwell.
“To allow for the continuous receipt of evidence and Affidavits would mean there is no end to the amount of damage that is sought to be piled on Amos. With respect, Amos cannot be tried and re-tried on the pretext of his offending postings with unrelated postings, his views on the charge, and his views on the case.”
Mr Dodwell charged that “all of this highly prejudicial material has been placed before the Judge to seek to color her mind, influencing the court against taking a decision to give Amos the lightest possible sentence and now even ordering that Amos be placed on remand for RTC consideration.”
To put Yee’s behaviour since 12 May to 2 June would hence be “wholly unfair and unjust on Amos to be under scrutiny merely because he has chosen, unlike others, to put his views and thoughts in his personal blog.”
Mr Dodwell said that “it is our contention that the whole trial-sentencing process has been tainted” as a result of the “irrelevant and highly prejudicial material placed before the Judge”.
He also noted that the prosecution had stated at the hearing on 2 June 2015 that fresh charges might be levied against Amos for his refusal to take down the offending postings.
“If that is so, why is it now placed before the Judge?” he wrote. “So, is Amos to be punished twice for this same matter of his refusal to take down his postings? The muddling of matters is extremely prejudicial to Amos.”
Mr Dodwell also called into question the effectiveness of an RTC sentence should it comes to pass, and indicated that doing so might impinge on his rights to free speech under Article 14 of the Singapore Constitution, as he has not been found guilty for all the posts that are now under consideration for his sentencing.
Mr Dodwell also highlighted the poor treatment that Yee has been subject to while in remand at Changi Prison.
Yee was apparently not given access to the legal documents that Mr Dodwell had prepared for him and put in the care of the prison officers with strict instructions for them to be given to Yee.
He also noted the treatment that Yee was subject to that left him in “a state of depression and having severe suicidal thoughts” which was aggravated by his time spent in remand. He then told the prison officer that he was feeling suicidal.
“Regrettably, as a result of what Amos shared, Amos was taken to the prison medical facility and strapped to a bed in a medical facility for approximately one and a half days. This episode aggravated Amos’s suicidal thoughts. He was restrained with one of his hands and one of his legs strapped to the bed. Amos informed us that he could only sit up or lie down. He found it extremely difficult to urinate and defecate. He was expected to urinate into a jar at the side of the bed, which would be left there after he does so notwithstanding the pungent odors which would emanate. He had to bend down painfully against his straps in order to do so. In the said medical ward, Amos was surrounded by patients who were mentally unsound. One patient was constantly jerking against his chains and another one would talk to himself and be unresponsive to other people. Furthermore, the lights were never switched off throughout the day and was glaring into our client’s eyes such that he could hardly have any restful sleep.”
In view of this, and considering Yee’s age and time already spent in remand, Mr Dodwell proposed that an RTC sentence would be inappropriate, and for the hearing date to be brought forward.
Click here to view Dodwell's letter.
PAP is trying very hard to torture Amos into submission ...they want to let him go but can't do so without saving face. Amos is not letting them off easy.
PAP doesn't want to incarcerate Amos for 2 years as that will be a permanent black mark and with Amos in jail when GE is called, PAP has another political hot potato to manage.
What is your bloody problem? You hate Todd Shane, you hate Ordinary Roy, now you hate Amos Yee. Actually, you hate that Christian bailor too. You are full of hate. You should go to Nepal to get rid of that hate.
Could be steffychun's gay partner
You might be right ...that's why shim was hurling insults at him when he bailed out Amos. Jealousy? Now that Vince is no longer with Amos, shim is defending him till the end of the world.
Amos Yee in prison but his Facebook page continues to get updated mysteriously
Published on Jun 19, 2015 9:50 PM
Amos Yee was remanded for three weeks on June 2, after District Judge Jasvender Kaur called for a report to assess if he is suitable for reformative training. -- PHOTO: ST FILE
By Olivia Ho
SINGAPORE - Teenage blogger Amos Yee is into his third week of remand at Changi Prison, yet his Facebook page has suddenly come alive again.
Since Thursday, seven posts so far have appeared at regular intervals on the 16-year-old's public page.
The first, which read "What's up doc? Hahahaha…", popped up at about 5pm on Thursday.
It was followed a few hours later by another post, which posed the question: "How is it that I am in prison, yet I am still able to post something on Facebook?"
It is still not clear how the Facebook page is being updated. The Singapore Prison Service has confirmed that all inmates and remandees do not have access to any telecommunication devices within the prison institutions.
Yee was remanded for three weeks on June 2, after District Judge Jasvender Kaur called for a report to assess if he is suitable for reformative training.
He had been found guilty on May 12 of uploading an obscene image and making remarks intending to hurt the feelings of Christians in a video.
Many of the mysterious Facebook posts complain about prison life. One laments the lack of exposure to sunshine, while another criticises the attitudes of police officers towards Yee's choice of a vegetarian diet.
One post reads: "Do you think that being in jail is a nice thing? I mean, I came out of remand, looking quite chirpy, though that might just be a façade for what's really going on inside, eh?"
Another compares Yee to figures of martyrdom such as Gandhi or Nelson Mandela.
All three of Yee's lawyers - Mr Alfred Dodwell, Mr Chong Jia Hao, and Mr Ervin Tan - said when contacted that they were not aware that the posts were being made.
Mr Chong said: "We aren't aware of how this is happening and we don't want to speculate. We'll just focus on preparing for the sentencing. Everything else is secondary."
Many netizens had their own theories on how the posts were happening. Some hazarded that Yee had written the posts beforehand and scheduled them to appear later. Others suggested that he had given his Facebook password to a third party, or that his account had been hacked.
Yee's mother Madam Mary Toh declined to comment on how the posts were being made.
Yee is next due in court on June 23, where he may learn his sentence.
[email protected]
Source: The Online Citizen
AG’s definition of “sub judice” called into question
JUNE 20, 2015 BY ANDREW LOH IN MAIN STORY, NEWS · 0 COMMENT
Jeyaretnam (left); Rajah (right)
Mr Kenneth Jeyaretnam has questioned what he described as the Attorney General’s (AG) “peculiar definition of sub judice” involving a letter to a judge.
He was referring to the AG’s reaction to the letter by the lawyer for 16-year old blogger, Amos Yee.
Singapore’s current AG is VK Rajah, a former Court of Appeal justice.
Mr Alfred Dodwell, who is representing Yee, had issued a strongly-worded letter on 12 June to the presiding judge of Yee’s trial to complain about the way the deputy public prosecutor was going about his case.
The Attorney General’s Chambers (AGC) quickly took umbrage at the letter, citing sub judice concerns, and informed Mr Dodwell of this.
The letter to judge Jasvendar Kaur was later reported on by The Online Citizen (TOC) which had also appended the letter with the report.
Mr Dodwell subsequently removed the letter which had been posted on his law firm’s website.
However, he said he will elaborate on his concerns over the treatment of Yee, who is currently being remanded at Changi Prison, at his client’s next hearing on 23 June.
The AGC also sent a letter to TOC, a day after the website’s report was published, asking for the article on the letter be removed completely from the site.
TOC at first only removed the letter, and informed the AGC about it, and also asked the AGC to specify exactly which parts of Mr Dodwell’s letter were deemed by it to be sub judice.
The AGC declined to do so.
TOC then removed its report entirely but told the AGC that it will continue to report on the Amos Yee case.
In a blog post on 20 June, Mr Jeyaretnam said, “It is difficult to see how the AG can justify his restrictions on [the] reporting of Dodwell’s letter. It does not prejudice Amos’s right to a fair trial (in any case he has already been convicted). Nor does it protect anyone’s right to privacy.”
Mr Jeyaretnam, who has also uploaded Mr Dodwell’s letter to his own blog, pointed out that Mr Dodwell “criticised the way that Justice Kaur had allowed the prosecution to introduce new evidence at the sentencing hearing which essentially constituted fresh charges for which Amos should have been tried and given the opportunity to defend himself.”
“He pointed out quite rightly that this was unfair,” Mr Jeyaretnam, who is also the secretary general of the political opposition Reform Party, said.
Mr Jeyaretnam said that although he was not legally trained, his understanding of the meaning of sub judice “is that it refers to the publication of material in the period between a person being charged with a crime and his subsequent conviction that could sway the jury and lead to an unfair trail.”
But he said two points made the AG’s claims redundant.
First, he noted that Singapore does not adopt the jury system, as in other countries, and decisions are made by judges.
“Judges are legally trained and supposed to be impartial and incapable of being swayed by public pressure which is why they are not sequestered like juries,” Mr Jeyaretnam said.
Second, he said that Yee’s trial has been completed and the teenager has already been convicted by the courts.
“Does Dodwell making public his letter to Justice Kaur risk prejudicing or interfering with legal proceedings?” Mr Jeyaretnam asked. “I would argue not since Amos has already been convicted.”
He added: “The only people protected by this absurd take-down notice are those… who are unjustly and unfairly using the obscenity law and the charge of wounding religious feelings to cruelly and inhumanely punish a child for exercising his rights to freedom of expression.
“This is a perversion of the purpose of contempt of court rules.”
He said the public have the “right to know what is being done to a 16 year old boy [which seem to be] for no other obvious purpose than to scare others from attacking the late Saint Harry’s reputation”, referring to the late former prime minister of Singapore, Lee Kuan Yew.
Yee is in his present situation because of a Youtube video he had made about the late Lee, shortly after the latter passed away earlier this year, which the authorities say also “wounded the religious feelings of Christians”.
“Just as in any other advanced country Singaporeans should have the right to criticise a judge’s decision when obviously inconsistent or unjust,” Mr Jeyaretnam said.
He said that Mr Dodwell’s letter remains available on his blog.
“The AG has yet to send me a take-down notice,” Mr Jeyaretnam said. “However, if I receive one, I intend to challenge it.”
*Yee would have spent a total of 39 days in remand at Changi Prison by the time of his next court hearing on 23 June.
Read Mr Jeyaretnam’s post here: “The AG’s Peculiar Definiton of Sub Judice“.
Note:
An archived copy of The Online Citizen's article, "Inappropriate to even consider RTC for Amos Yee: Teen’s lawyer" ordered to be taken down by AGC can be found here.
AG’s definition of “sub judice” called into question
JUNE 20, 2015 BY ANDREW LOH IN MAIN STORY, NEWS · 0 COMMENT
Jeyaretnam (left); Rajah (right)
Mr Kenneth Jeyaretnam has questioned what he described as the Attorney General’s (AG) “peculiar definition of sub judice” involving a letter to a judge.
He was referring to the AG’s reaction to the letter by the lawyer for 16-year old blogger, Amos Yee.
Singapore’s current AG is VK Rajah, a former Court of Appeal justice.
Mr Alfred Dodwell, who is representing Yee, had issued a strongly-worded letter on 12 June to the presiding judge of Yee’s trial to complain about the way the deputy public prosecutor was going about his case.
The Attorney General’s Chambers (AGC) quickly took umbrage at the letter, citing sub judice concerns, and informed Mr Dodwell of this.
The letter to judge Jasvendar Kaur was later reported on by The Online Citizen (TOC) which had also appended the letter with the report.
Mr Dodwell subsequently removed the letter which had been posted on his law firm’s website.
However, he said he will elaborate on his concerns over the treatment of Yee, who is currently being remanded at Changi Prison, at his client’s next hearing on 23 June.
The AGC also sent a letter to TOC, a day after the website’s report was published, asking for the article on the letter be removed completely from the site.
TOC at first only removed the letter, and informed the AGC about it, and also asked the AGC to specify exactly which parts of Mr Dodwell’s letter were deemed by it to be sub judice.
The AGC declined to do so.
TOC then removed its report entirely but told the AGC that it will continue to report on the Amos Yee case.
In a blog post on 20 June, Mr Jeyaretnam said, “It is difficult to see how the AG can justify his restrictions on [the] reporting of Dodwell’s letter. It does not prejudice Amos’s right to a fair trial (in any case he has already been convicted). Nor does it protect anyone’s right to privacy.”
Mr Jeyaretnam, who has also uploaded Mr Dodwell’s letter to his own blog, pointed out that Mr Dodwell “criticised the way that Justice Kaur had allowed the prosecution to introduce new evidence at the sentencing hearing which essentially constituted fresh charges for which Amos should have been tried and given the opportunity to defend himself.”
“He pointed out quite rightly that this was unfair,” Mr Jeyaretnam, who is also the secretary general of the political opposition Reform Party, said.
Mr Jeyaretnam said that although he was not legally trained, his understanding of the meaning of sub judice “is that it refers to the publication of material in the period between a person being charged with a crime and his subsequent conviction that could sway the jury and lead to an unfair trail.”
But he said two points made the AG’s claims redundant.
First, he noted that Singapore does not adopt the jury system, as in other countries, and decisions are made by judges.
“Judges are legally trained and supposed to be impartial and incapable of being swayed by public pressure which is why they are not sequestered like juries,” Mr Jeyaretnam said.
Second, he said that Yee’s trial has been completed and the teenager has already been convicted by the courts.
“Does Dodwell making public his letter to Justice Kaur risk prejudicing or interfering with legal proceedings?” Mr Jeyaretnam asked. “I would argue not since Amos has already been convicted.”
He added: “The only people protected by this absurd take-down notice are those… who are unjustly and unfairly using the obscenity law and the charge of wounding religious feelings to cruelly and inhumanely punish a child for exercising his rights to freedom of expression.
“This is a perversion of the purpose of contempt of court rules.”
He said the public have the “right to know what is being done to a 16 year old boy [which seem to be] for no other obvious purpose than to scare others from attacking the late Saint Harry’s reputation”, referring to the late former prime minister of Singapore, Lee Kuan Yew.
Yee is in his present situation because of a Youtube video he had made about the late Lee, shortly after the latter passed away earlier this year, which the authorities say also “wounded the religious feelings of Christians”.
“Just as in any other advanced country Singaporeans should have the right to criticise a judge’s decision when obviously inconsistent or unjust,” Mr Jeyaretnam said.
He said that Mr Dodwell’s letter remains available on his blog.
“The AG has yet to send me a take-down notice,” Mr Jeyaretnam said. “However, if I receive one, I intend to challenge it.”
*Yee would have spent a total of 39 days in remand at Changi Prison by the time of his next court hearing on 23 June.
Read Mr Jeyaretnam’s post here: “The AG’s Peculiar Definiton of Sub Judice“.
End of Article
Note:
An archived copy of The Online Citizen's article, "Inappropriate to even consider RTC for Amos Yee: Teen’s lawyer" ordered to be taken down by AGC can be found here.
AMOS YEE, S'PORE'S 'BRAVEST BOY', IS BACK: Out from remand & attacking PAP!
Amos is charged for making offensive remarks against Christianity and circulating obscene imagery. So by pointing out his comment about f*ck govt and saying that he ain't remorseful, are you suggesting that the charges are actually of politics nature.
Amos Yee is now a hot figure internationally and on the top list of many many reporters .... any illegal or hasty move from the papayas will be magnified 1000 times big and spread wild international newspapers and magazine and internet now .... just read those reports of Singapore government and papayas on the free website of international news of those angmoh countries new agencies about Amos Yee will know.
Full article: http://www.malaysia-chronicle.com/in...#ixzz3dZCYzWnB
Amos is charged for making offensive remarks against Christianity and circulating obscene imagery. So by pointing out his comment about f*ck govt and saying that he ain't remorseful, are you suggesting that the charges are actually of politics nature.
Amos Yee is now a hot figure internationally and on the top list of many many reporters .... any illegal or hasty move from the papayas will be magnified 1000 times big and spread wild international newspapers and magazine and internet now .... just read those reports of Singapore government and papayas on the free website of international news of those angmoh countries new agencies about Amos Yee will know.
Full article: http://www.malaysia-chronicle.com/in...#ixzz3dZCYzWnB
The PAP did want to charge Amos for insulting Lee CONs You but stayed it as it would have gathered international criticism. So, they played up the anti-Christian slant.
Was Amos anti-Christian? Not at all. He didn't believe in Jesus and stated it. More importantly, he brought up Jesus in the context of comparing Lee CONs You with Jesus. PAP government made Lee CONs You into a god. Thus, Amos' comparison was appropriate.
To answer your question ...the incarceration of Amos is political.
We need the world to recognize Amos Yee as the youngest political detainee of the PAP.
So far, he has been detained more than a month for criticising Lee CONs You.
Source: The Online Citizen
AG’s definition of “sub judice” called into question
JUNE 20, 2015 BY ANDREW LOH IN MAIN STORY, NEWS · 0 COMMENT
Jeyaretnam (left); Rajah (right)
Mr Kenneth Jeyaretnam has questioned what he described as the Attorney General’s (AG) “peculiar definition of sub judice” involving a letter to a judge.
He was referring to the AG’s reaction to the letter by the lawyer for 16-year old blogger, Amos Yee.
Singapore’s current AG is VK Rajah, a former Court of Appeal justice.
Mr Alfred Dodwell, who is representing Yee, had issued a strongly-worded letter on 12 June to the presiding judge of Yee’s trial to complain about the way the deputy public prosecutor was going about his case.
The Attorney General’s Chambers (AGC) quickly took umbrage at the letter, citing sub judice concerns, and informed Mr Dodwell of this.
The letter to judge Jasvendar Kaur was later reported on by The Online Citizen (TOC) which had also appended the letter with the report.
Mr Dodwell subsequently removed the letter which had been posted on his law firm’s website.
However, he said he will elaborate on his concerns over the treatment of Yee, who is currently being remanded at Changi Prison, at his client’s next hearing on 23 June.
The AGC also sent a letter to TOC, a day after the website’s report was published, asking for the article on the letter be removed completely from the site.
TOC at first only removed the letter, and informed the AGC about it, and also asked the AGC to specify exactly which parts of Mr Dodwell’s letter were deemed by it to be sub judice.
The AGC declined to do so.
TOC then removed its report entirely but told the AGC that it will continue to report on the Amos Yee case.
In a blog post on 20 June, Mr Jeyaretnam said, “It is difficult to see how the AG can justify his restrictions on [the] reporting of Dodwell’s letter. It does not prejudice Amos’s right to a fair trial (in any case he has already been convicted). Nor does it protect anyone’s right to privacy.”
Mr Jeyaretnam, who has also uploaded Mr Dodwell’s letter to his own blog, pointed out that Mr Dodwell “criticised the way that Justice Kaur had allowed the prosecution to introduce new evidence at the sentencing hearing which essentially constituted fresh charges for which Amos should have been tried and given the opportunity to defend himself.”
“He pointed out quite rightly that this was unfair,” Mr Jeyaretnam, who is also the secretary general of the political opposition Reform Party, said.
Mr Jeyaretnam said that although he was not legally trained, his understanding of the meaning of sub judice “is that it refers to the publication of material in the period between a person being charged with a crime and his subsequent conviction that could sway the jury and lead to an unfair trail.”
But he said two points made the AG’s claims redundant.
First, he noted that Singapore does not adopt the jury system, as in other countries, and decisions are made by judges.
“Judges are legally trained and supposed to be impartial and incapable of being swayed by public pressure which is why they are not sequestered like juries,” Mr Jeyaretnam said.
Second, he said that Yee’s trial has been completed and the teenager has already been convicted by the courts.
“Does Dodwell making public his letter to Justice Kaur risk prejudicing or interfering with legal proceedings?” Mr Jeyaretnam asked. “I would argue not since Amos has already been convicted.”
He added: “The only people protected by this absurd take-down notice are those… who are unjustly and unfairly using the obscenity law and the charge of wounding religious feelings to cruelly and inhumanely punish a child for exercising his rights to freedom of expression.
“This is a perversion of the purpose of contempt of court rules.”
He said the public have the “right to know what is being done to a 16 year old boy [which seem to be] for no other obvious purpose than to scare others from attacking the late Saint Harry’s reputation”, referring to the late former prime minister of Singapore, Lee Kuan Yew.
Yee is in his present situation because of a Youtube video he had made about the late Lee, shortly after the latter passed away earlier this year, which the authorities say also “wounded the religious feelings of Christians”.
“Just as in any other advanced country Singaporeans should have the right to criticise a judge’s decision when obviously inconsistent or unjust,” Mr Jeyaretnam said.
He said that Mr Dodwell’s letter remains available on his blog.
“The AG has yet to send me a take-down notice,” Mr Jeyaretnam said. “However, if I receive one, I intend to challenge it.”
*Yee would have spent a total of 39 days in remand at Changi Prison by the time of his next court hearing on 23 June.
Read Mr Jeyaretnam’s post here: “The AG’s Peculiar Definiton of Sub Judice“.
End of Article
Note:
An archived copy of The Online Citizen's article, "Inappropriate to even consider RTC for Amos Yee: Teen’s lawyer" ordered to be taken down by AGC can be found here.
Kudos to Kenneth Jeyaratnam for standing up for Amos Yee. Where are the other opposition leaders? If they can't stand up for a kid, how can we trust them to stand up for sinkees?
Give your votes to the Reform Party because it has a leader who stands up for sinkees.
Agreed with u . The rest of the opp party all act blur . At least reform party dare to stand up for justice . The rest all know how to wayang . That woman lawyer in workers party ( you know who I'm talking about
) don't even dare to speak up . She knows the law but refused to use her knowledge to help Amos .Agreed with u . The rest of the opp party all act blur . At least reform party dare to stand up for justice . The rest all know how to wayang . That woman lawyer in workers party ( you know who I'm talking about
Slowlt but surely Sinkies will see tat Kenneth is a real deal, he stand for Justice for every Sinkies.
[h=2]IF YOU CRITICIZE, YOU'RE MAD? LKY critic Amos Yee to undergo mental tests[/h]
Full article: http://www.malaysia-chronicle.com/i...o-undergo-mental-tests&Itemid=4#ixzz3dxE2Y61x
Teenage blogger Amos Yee will be remanded for two weeks at the Institute of Mental Health (IMH) to undergo a psychiatric assessment.
The court heard on Tuesday (June 23) morning that a report found the 16-year-old physically and mentally fit to undergo reformative training.
A psychiatric assessment by Dr Munidasa Winslow in the report, however, also suggested that Yee may be suffering from autism spectrum disorder.
District Judge Jasvender Kaur then ordered for Yee to be remanded at IMH for two weeks, calling for a report to assess his suitability for a Mandatory Treatment Order (MTO). An MTO requires an offender to undergo psychiatric treatment for up to two years in lieu of imprisonment.
Yee's case is scheduled to be heard again on July 6, when Judge Kaur will consider sentencing options such as MTO and reformative training.
Deputy Public Prosecutor Hay Hung Chun noted that the prosecution had suggested psychiatric assessment for Yee on two previous occasions, including a May 6 bail review.
Most of Tuesday's three-hour session was conducted behind closed doors.
Yee appeared in the dock briefly, shackled and clad in a white prison T-shirt and brown trousers. He seemed wan and unkempt, and did not smile as has been his wont during court appearances.
Defence lawyer Chong Jia Hao said that Yee had told his lawyers he was willing to undergo treatment at IMH if necessary.
Yee's mother, Madam Mary Toh, appeared in court wearing a white T-shirt with a #FreeAmosYee message in support of her son. The shirt's logo was a picture of Yee in a banana-esque submarine, referencing the Beatles' hit Yellow Submarine.
His father Alphonsus Yee told reporters that to his knowledge, Yee had not been previously assessed for autism spectrum disorder.
He said: "There have been a lot of speculations online about this, but nothing in his growing up years suggested this."
Yee was found guilty on May 12 of making remarks intending to hurt the feelings of Christians in a video which criticised Singapore's founding prime minister Lee Kuan Yew, as well as for uploading an obscene image with the faces of Mr Lee and former British premier Margaret Thatcher superimposed on it.
He had been remanded for three weeks since June 2 after Judge Kaur called for a report to assess if he was suitable for reformative training.
The prosecution had called for Yee to be sent for reformative training, as he had not cooperated with his assigned probation officer.
The defence, however, argued this was a disproportionate punishment for Yee's offence.
On Monday, the United Nations Human Rights Office for South-east Asia called for Yee's immediate release.
In a statement, the Bangkok-based Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) urged the Singapore Government to review his conviction. It also asked that prosecutors drop their demand that Yee be sentenced to a stint at the Reformative Training Centre (RTC).
Reformative training is a rehabilitative sentencing option for young offenders aged under 21 who are found to be unsuitable for probation.
A stint at RTC lasts between 18 and 30 months, and includes structured rehabilitation programmes, foot drills and counselling. Offenders will not have contact with adult prison inmates, but will have a criminal record.
Although Yee has been in remand for three weeks without access to any telecommunications devices, his Facebook page has been constantly updated since last Thursday.
The posts, the origins of which remain unclear, centre largely around his grievances towards life in Changi Prison, such as the lack of sunshine or privacy in his cell. - http://singaporeseen.stomp.com.sg/
Full article: http://www.malaysia-chronicle.com/i...o-undergo-mental-tests&Itemid=4#ixzz3dxE2Y61x
Teenage blogger Amos Yee will be remanded for two weeks at the Institute of Mental Health (IMH) to undergo a psychiatric assessment.
The court heard on Tuesday (June 23) morning that a report found the 16-year-old physically and mentally fit to undergo reformative training.
A psychiatric assessment by Dr Munidasa Winslow in the report, however, also suggested that Yee may be suffering from autism spectrum disorder.
District Judge Jasvender Kaur then ordered for Yee to be remanded at IMH for two weeks, calling for a report to assess his suitability for a Mandatory Treatment Order (MTO). An MTO requires an offender to undergo psychiatric treatment for up to two years in lieu of imprisonment.
Yee's case is scheduled to be heard again on July 6, when Judge Kaur will consider sentencing options such as MTO and reformative training.
Deputy Public Prosecutor Hay Hung Chun noted that the prosecution had suggested psychiatric assessment for Yee on two previous occasions, including a May 6 bail review.
Most of Tuesday's three-hour session was conducted behind closed doors.
Yee appeared in the dock briefly, shackled and clad in a white prison T-shirt and brown trousers. He seemed wan and unkempt, and did not smile as has been his wont during court appearances.
Defence lawyer Chong Jia Hao said that Yee had told his lawyers he was willing to undergo treatment at IMH if necessary.
Yee's mother, Madam Mary Toh, appeared in court wearing a white T-shirt with a #FreeAmosYee message in support of her son. The shirt's logo was a picture of Yee in a banana-esque submarine, referencing the Beatles' hit Yellow Submarine.
His father Alphonsus Yee told reporters that to his knowledge, Yee had not been previously assessed for autism spectrum disorder.
He said: "There have been a lot of speculations online about this, but nothing in his growing up years suggested this."
Yee was found guilty on May 12 of making remarks intending to hurt the feelings of Christians in a video which criticised Singapore's founding prime minister Lee Kuan Yew, as well as for uploading an obscene image with the faces of Mr Lee and former British premier Margaret Thatcher superimposed on it.
He had been remanded for three weeks since June 2 after Judge Kaur called for a report to assess if he was suitable for reformative training.
The prosecution had called for Yee to be sent for reformative training, as he had not cooperated with his assigned probation officer.
The defence, however, argued this was a disproportionate punishment for Yee's offence.
On Monday, the United Nations Human Rights Office for South-east Asia called for Yee's immediate release.
In a statement, the Bangkok-based Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) urged the Singapore Government to review his conviction. It also asked that prosecutors drop their demand that Yee be sentenced to a stint at the Reformative Training Centre (RTC).
Reformative training is a rehabilitative sentencing option for young offenders aged under 21 who are found to be unsuitable for probation.
A stint at RTC lasts between 18 and 30 months, and includes structured rehabilitation programmes, foot drills and counselling. Offenders will not have contact with adult prison inmates, but will have a criminal record.
Although Yee has been in remand for three weeks without access to any telecommunications devices, his Facebook page has been constantly updated since last Thursday.
The posts, the origins of which remain unclear, centre largely around his grievances towards life in Changi Prison, such as the lack of sunshine or privacy in his cell. - http://singaporeseen.stomp.com.sg/
And stupid Singaporeans living in stone age will believe the labelling, no need to ask for proof from the accuser, say no smoke without fire wor. Instead they expect the accused to answer, to account and to explain. If no answer means guilty.
And worse they will join in the cruelty to hammer the accused instead of hammering the evil element that dealt the low blow. It is true stupid govt elected by stupid people!
Similar threads
