-
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.
Ginfreely vs Coalition Thread
- Thread starter ginfreely
- Start date
Telliny facts is called tellling lies to malicious Malaysian cheebye! Slap your cheap mouth!You are a vulgar, uncouth, no hymen lying harlot!
SLAPS!
Ok world don’t forget this fact!
Couple of points:So your this post is not agreeing with me that he is insinuating insults on me?
sammyboy.com/posts/2717164
If you had not insulted him first, and if he ended up insulting (NOT "insinuating") you first at any point in time after he joined in early October 2016, then I would agree with you that he (and not you) was the one who started the quarrel.
1. You have claimed several times to have scored A1 for both English and English Literature, and yet you can't seem to differentiate between "insinuating insults" and "insulting (NOT "insinuating")"?
Or are you maliciously refusing to differentiate between the two?
2. All his insults (not just insinuations) and any other kind of online attack against you happened after you first insulted him in one of his threads on "30-10-2016, 06:45 PM", even though he was not talking about you at all:
sammyboy.com/posts/2716572
which is why I said I would agree with you that he started the quarrel only "if you had not insulted him first"; furthermore, if not for that post of yours on "30-10-2016, 06:45 PM", not only would he be guilty of starting the quarrel, all his insults against you would be direct, not just insinuations.
Another couple of points:
1. Unless I'm mistaken, that was a direct insult (i.e. he either named you, "ginfreely", in his post or simply replied to your post by quoting it), not just an "insinuation", so it seems that your English is worsening.
2. Was that after or before you first insulted him on "30-10-2016, 06:45 PM"? I've already said before in the post you're replying to:
sammyboy.com/posts/2717445
If you're referring to his insults after 30 October 2016, which were actually direct insults and not just "insinuating" you, and if you're using those examples to claim that he started the quarrel, then I'm afraid you're simply trying to cover up the fact that you were truly the one who "drew first blood", in order to play the "victim". :(
The only way you can win this argument is if you can manage to find a post of his before that post of yours (on "30-10-2016, 06:45 PM") in which he clearly mentions "ginfreely" or in which he quotes your post to reply to; and obviously, if you do manage to find it, please post it in this thread, otherwise you would also be guilty of "hot air", right?
Once again:
sammyboy.com/posts/2717164
Attachments
Last edited:
No his insinuating insult of me walking naked in India was definitely before I insulted him. You can dig out that post but you refused to. Instead you harped on my post as the first insult when his insinuating result was what started it and proven now you can’t answer if he is not insinuating me then who why and how he knew beforehand.Couple of points:
1. You have claimed several times to have scored A1 for both English and English Literature, and yet you can't seem to differentiate between "insinuating insults" and "insulting (NOT "insinuating")"?o_O
Or are you maliciously refusing to differentiate between the two?
2. All his insults (not just insinuations) and any other kind of online attack against you happened after you first insulted him in one of his threads on "30-10-2016, 06:45 PM", even though he was not talking about you at all:
sammyboy.com/posts/2716572
which is why I said I would agree with you that he started the quarrel only "if you had not insulted him first"; furthermore, if not for that post of yours on "30-10-2016, 06:45 PM", not only would he be guilty of starting the quarrel, all his insults against you would be direct, not just insinuations.
Another couple of points:
1. Unless I'm mistaken, that was a direct insult (i.e. he either named you, "ginfreely", in his post or simply replied to your post by quoting it), not just an "insinuation", so it seems that your English is worsening.
2. Was that after or before you first insulted him on "30-10-2016, 06:45 PM"? I've already said before in the post you're replying to:
sammyboy.com/posts/2717445
Once again:
sammyboy.com/posts/2717164
You are the one deliberately splitting hair between direct insult and insinuating insult when there is no difference it made to who started it. Just like KT latha saying someone is acting like a slut is an insinuating insult and she is the one who started it. No doubt at all. No need English A1 to know that, only malicious people trying to split hair to twist it to I am the one insulting @Cottonmouth first when he is exactly like KT latha.
And you are one that don’t change topic from you saying sorry to me for false allegations of me being vain to buy landed to this cottonmouth insinuating insult shit. So obvious you know hahahahaha
So don’t change topic flatearth shit musashi when are you going to say sorry to me????
Doctor accused of raping patient goes on trial
File photo.
By Jalelah Abu Baker
30 Apr 2018 12:30PM(Updated: 30 Apr 2018 01:36PM)
Share this content
Bookmark
SINGAPORE: A doctor who was attending to his regular female patient allegedly raped her after she had gone to him complaining of an itch in her genitals and frequent urination.
The victim testified in a closed-door hearing on the opening day of the trial on Monday (Apr 30).
Wee Teong Boo, 67, is accused of committing the offence while examining the victim, who cannot be named due to a gag order.
In their opening address, Deputy Public Prosecutors Sharmila Sripathy-Shanaz, Amanda Chong and Chew Xin Ying said that on Dec 30, 2015, the victim, who was then 23, visited Wee’s clinic in Bedok at about 11.30pm.
According to court documents, after the victim lay down and pulled up her T-shirt for Wee to examine her abdomen, he pulled the victim’s shorts down. He then rubbed her private parts over her underwear, asking if that was what was itchy.
Wee then asked her to lower her shorts and underwear further in order to check her private parts. She pulled them to thigh level, but he asked her to remove them, and he proceeded to remove them completely.
Wee then positioned the victim such that he was between her legs. Court documents show that the victim heard the sound of a zipper. She then felt a poking sensation in her genitals, and saw Wee’s body moving forward and backward with each poking sensation.
Wee re-positioned the victim when she complained of pain. It was then that the victim managed to see what was in her private parts. Wee’s pants were unzipped, and when the victim went to the toilet immediately after, she found blood stains.
“Still in a state of shock, the victim collected her medication and left the clinic,” the prosecutors said in their opening address.
VICTIM COULD NOT SLEEP THAT NIGHT
Later, when she showered and washed her private parts, she felt pain and found bloodstains when she wiped herself after using the toilet throughout the night, the court heard.
She was also unable to sleep and confided in her mother, who found her awake and tossing and turning in bed in the early hours of the morning. On the same day, she made a police report.
According to court documents, the victim suffered a hymen tear and and two small wounds.
Court documents also show that a month before the incident, Wee rubbed the victim's private parts over her underwear while examining her for gastric discomfort.
While the victim felt uneasy she did not voice her discomfort, as she assumed it was part of the medical examination and she trusted her doctor, who she had been seeing for about a year, the court heard.
Wee was charged with rape and molest on Feb 24 last year.
In a first of its kind for an ongoing court case, the Singapore Medical Council ordered that he be barred from carrying out consultations with female patients unless he is accompanied by a female doctor acting as a chaperone.
He also cannot examine the breast, pelvic, genital or anal areas of female patients, according to the 18-month order that came into effect on May 1 last year.
The prosecution is expected to produce 15 witnesses over the trial period.
If convicted of rape, Wee faces 20 years in jail and a fine.
The maximum penalty for outrage of modesty is two years’ jail, fine, caning, or any combination of punishments. However, as he is above 50 years old, no caning will be imposed.
Source: CNA/ja
File photo.
By Jalelah Abu Baker
30 Apr 2018 12:30PM(Updated: 30 Apr 2018 01:36PM)
Share this content
Bookmark
SINGAPORE: A doctor who was attending to his regular female patient allegedly raped her after she had gone to him complaining of an itch in her genitals and frequent urination.
The victim testified in a closed-door hearing on the opening day of the trial on Monday (Apr 30).
Wee Teong Boo, 67, is accused of committing the offence while examining the victim, who cannot be named due to a gag order.
In their opening address, Deputy Public Prosecutors Sharmila Sripathy-Shanaz, Amanda Chong and Chew Xin Ying said that on Dec 30, 2015, the victim, who was then 23, visited Wee’s clinic in Bedok at about 11.30pm.
According to court documents, after the victim lay down and pulled up her T-shirt for Wee to examine her abdomen, he pulled the victim’s shorts down. He then rubbed her private parts over her underwear, asking if that was what was itchy.
Wee then asked her to lower her shorts and underwear further in order to check her private parts. She pulled them to thigh level, but he asked her to remove them, and he proceeded to remove them completely.
Wee then positioned the victim such that he was between her legs. Court documents show that the victim heard the sound of a zipper. She then felt a poking sensation in her genitals, and saw Wee’s body moving forward and backward with each poking sensation.
Wee re-positioned the victim when she complained of pain. It was then that the victim managed to see what was in her private parts. Wee’s pants were unzipped, and when the victim went to the toilet immediately after, she found blood stains.
“Still in a state of shock, the victim collected her medication and left the clinic,” the prosecutors said in their opening address.
VICTIM COULD NOT SLEEP THAT NIGHT
Later, when she showered and washed her private parts, she felt pain and found bloodstains when she wiped herself after using the toilet throughout the night, the court heard.
She was also unable to sleep and confided in her mother, who found her awake and tossing and turning in bed in the early hours of the morning. On the same day, she made a police report.
According to court documents, the victim suffered a hymen tear and and two small wounds.
Court documents also show that a month before the incident, Wee rubbed the victim's private parts over her underwear while examining her for gastric discomfort.
While the victim felt uneasy she did not voice her discomfort, as she assumed it was part of the medical examination and she trusted her doctor, who she had been seeing for about a year, the court heard.
Wee was charged with rape and molest on Feb 24 last year.
In a first of its kind for an ongoing court case, the Singapore Medical Council ordered that he be barred from carrying out consultations with female patients unless he is accompanied by a female doctor acting as a chaperone.
He also cannot examine the breast, pelvic, genital or anal areas of female patients, according to the 18-month order that came into effect on May 1 last year.
The prosecution is expected to produce 15 witnesses over the trial period.
If convicted of rape, Wee faces 20 years in jail and a fine.
The maximum penalty for outrage of modesty is two years’ jail, fine, caning, or any combination of punishments. However, as he is above 50 years old, no caning will be imposed.
Source: CNA/ja
It's a valid diagnosis, she said her cheebye was itchy and he relieved her itch.
GIRL: 医生，我下面很痒
bangla with body odor named “pang”.
yup, definitely virgin with her ocd of keeping her cheebye covered. she can go hands-free by wearing a chastity belt.Can't disagree with you. My standard is out of style. She is definitely a virgin chiobu by the way she anxiously covered her private part. You must be salivating at her that gives her the fright.
She can make a video of herself on all 4 with one leg in the air and bark.
Here are some photos of him:
todayonline.com/singapore/victim-takes-stand-trial-doctor-charged-raping-patient
straitstimes.com/singapore/courts-crime/conditions-imposed-on-doctor-accused-of-rape-molestation
straitstimes.com/singapore/courts-crime/doctor-66-charged-with-raping-and-molesting-female-patient-23
Attachments
Here are some photos of him:
todayonline.com/singapore/victim-takes-stand-trial-doctor-charged-raping-patient
straitstimes.com/singapore/courts-crime/conditions-imposed-on-doctor-accused-of-rape-molestation
straitstimes.com/singapore/courts-crime/doctor-66-charged-with-raping-and-molesting-female-patient-23
Let's get Gin to ID him.
Here are some photos of him:
todayonline.com/singapore/victim-takes-stand-trial-doctor-charged-raping-patient
straitstimes.com/singapore/courts-crime/conditions-imposed-on-doctor-accused-of-rape-molestation
straitstimes.com/singapore/courts-crime/doctor-66-charged-with-raping-and-molesting-female-patient-23
Possible to CSI the slut with the 下面痒？
Similar threads
- Poll