Let the PAPies show us TRUE Graciousness. Ong Kah Chua needs medical supervision.

[silverfox@]

Indeed you are binded.

You have concluded that Mr Seng is a very good man and that if we don't belive in your insistence, we can denounce you for spilling bullshit. So the onus now is on you, to provide your own personal expereince with Mr Seng to say that he is a good man.

Else we can call you a bullshitter simply because you have open the invitation for all the readers here to do so.

Which part of my earlier post did I conclude that Mr Seng is a very good man?
Can you show me?

If you can't prove that, then who is the one bullshitting?

You said earlier that I said OKC should be flog, which I never mentioned. Till now, you can't even prove that I said OKC should be flog. In a simple layman context, literally, you are trying to put words into my mouth.

That Mr Ong be accorded with the world class brand of our Leader's graciousness and be show mercy.

No part in any of the postings in this thread is saying OKC is innocent. Got that ? Are you clear ?

Please don't confuse yourself further.

While you are out calling for OKC to be prosecuted fully and be shown no mercy, thousands of our elderly are living sordid miserable lives.

That is the bigger issue at hand.

Dan

Since you are calling for leniency, or so-called graciousness on OKC, I would suggest
Your utmost task now is not to blab non-stop on the internet, as apparently I said it once, I say it again.
Talk is free or in some cases cheap.

Spending time arguing with me will not get OKC off the hook nor get him a lighter sentence. Rather than wait for others to help, or depend on graciousness, which is not within your control.

You can, could, contribute some money to engage a good lawyer to help him plead for leniency.

This is the difference between one who talks the walk or walks the talk.

 

[lockeliberal]

Dear Dan

The mitigating circumstances in your view excuses his crime. Some of us feel otherwise that the circumstances as you have stated will only mitigate the sentence and believe that he has to be found guilty,

If he is found insane , clinically insane and not aware of the deed, then yes locked up in IMH because of a not guilty due to insanity would be acceptable if the court appointed psych or a defence psych pleads insanity as a defense.

In the absence of the circumstances as stated, all else becomes mitigation or a plea for leiniency after a guilty verdict. It is not a defense full stop



Locke

 

[Dan Now]

Which part of my earlier post did I conclude that Mr Seng is a very good man?
Can you show me?

If you can't prove that, then who is the one bullshitting?

You said earlier that I said OKC should be flog, which I never mentioned. Till now, you can't even prove that I said OKC should be flog. In a simple layman context, literally, you are trying to put words into my mouth.


Since you are calling for leniency, or so-called graciousness on OKC, I would suggest
Your utmost task now is not to blab non-stop on the internet, as apparently I said it once, I say it again.
Talk is free or in some cases cheap.

Spending time arguing with me will not get OKC off the hook nor get him a lighter sentence. Rather than wait for others to help, or depend on graciousness, which is not within your control.

You can, could, contribute some money to engage a good lawyer to help him plead for leniency.

This is the difference between one who talks the walk or walks the talk.

It is up to you the PAP voting type and your MIWs in white to walk your talk of graciouness, compassion and love for the people.

Talk is cheap indeed, let our legal system then provide the best lawyers for OKC and help him pay for expert services.

All it takes is for you to afford compassion.

Less Blab, more compassion.

Cheers

 

[silverfox@]

Indeed, your talk is cheaper because you cannot afford mercy, graciousness and compassion.

Cheers

Affording mercy, graciousness and compassion must be carried out in real life. Not via talking on the internet spelling out these 3 words.

 

[VIBGYOR]

Mr Ong, as the STATE Media have reported is a regular at our IMH. And he is of an advance age of 70. Why should he be charge in court in the first place ? How progressive and gracious are our Singapore Elites when they should resort to placing an old man with mental difficiency to be charge and given the maximum sentence ?

Why did our AG at our courts even allowed the case to be entered in our courts in the first place ?

Mai Picah My LoBang Lah!!

We are all here to serve the Last Emperor Pinky!!

 

[lockeliberal]

Dear Dan

Errrr "medical supervision" is for a court to decide. You have try to claim he is "crazy" because sane people do not "hurt" other people and therefore in need of medical supervision even before he has gone to court.


My point to you is that sane people do try to hurt people for whatever reason. Whether he is insane, deserves only "medical supervision" is for the courts to decide.

In calling for graciousness for him, in calling for medical supervision for him before he has even gone to court. I believe that you have already decided on a result and are advocating the result no matter the process.



Locke

 

[Dan Now]

Affording mercy, graciousness and compassion must be carried out in real life. Not via talking on the internet spelling out these 3 words.

So all this time you are blabbing then ?
You should lead by example and pay for OKC legal services first.

Onus is on you

 

[silverfox@]

It is up to you the PAP voting type and your MIWs in white to walk your talk of graciouness, compassion and love for the people.

Talk is cheap indeed, let our legal system then provide the best lawyers for OKC and help him pay for expert services.

All it takes is for you to afford compassion.

Less Blab, more compassion.

Cheers

Whether OKC douses petrol on Seng Han Thong or Chiam See Thong or Chee Soon Juan or any Tom Dick Harry, he should not be let off with a light sentence.

We are talking about a human's life for goodness sake.

 

[Dan Now]

Affording mercy, graciousness and compassion must be carried out in real life. Not via talking on the internet spelling out these 3 words.

On another note,

Your expert services is best utilise for a "BURN OKC and send him to hell" campaign.

Walk your talk about showing NO MERCY and Compassion for Mr Ong.

Stop blabing, and start acting on your hatred for Mr Ong.

Dan

 

[KKC007]

In the same manner you have concluded that he was mentally sound, I have concluded that he might be mentally unsound.

Cheers

I've never concluded he was mentally sound. If the defense wants to use this in court, it is up to them to convince the court that he was not of sound mind during the attack.

 

[Dan Now]

Dear Dan

Errrr "medical supervision" is for a court to decide. You have try to claim he is "crazy" because sane people do not "hurt" other people and therefore in need of medical supervision even before he has gone to court.


My point to you is that sane people do try to hurt people for whatever reason. Whether he is insane, deserves only "medical supervision" is for the courts to decide.

In calling for graciousness for him, in calling for medical supervision for him before he has even gone to court. I believe that you have already decided on a result and are advocating the result no matter the process.



Locke

Locke ar...

Please don't try stunts on me la dude.

You are plainly saying he is not insane. Or could be sane. You are simply denying any rights of him to be accorded medical supervision no matter the process la.

I am simply saying for countless time, that he should be given medical superversion because HE HAVE A TRACK RECORD OF MENTAL ILLNESS.

Wah piang eh.

Dan

 

[Dan Now]

Dear Dan

The mitigating circumstances in your view excuses his crime. Some of us feel otherwise that the circumstances as you have stated will only mitigate the sentence and believe that he has to be found guilty,

If he is found insane , clinically insane and not aware of the deed, then yes locked up in IMH because of a not guilty due to insanity would be acceptable if the court appointed psych or a defence psych pleads insanity as a defense.

In the absence of the circumstances as stated, all else becomes mitigation or a plea for leiniency after a guilty verdict. It is not a defense full stop



Locke

Locke,

You are plainly saying that ALL mitigating circumstances is irrelavant. Rejecting it outright.

NO ONE INCLUDING ME in this entire thread says he is innocent and be let off. Can you read ?

Your extremist views that all any mitigating cirumstances is irrelavent shows the depths of your very bias to want OKC be given the maximum sentence and be flogged.

This forum now knows where you stand and that you cannot even manage a single dram of braincells to consider weather Mr Ong can afford the expensive fees in the court to afford a good defence lawyer and expert psychiatric witness.

Dan

 

[lockeliberal]

Dear Dan

Define "medical supervision" ? . Are you saying that he should be under "medical supervision and thus have no need to be tried in a court of law ?

mental illness comes in degree's and extent and that is determined by the courts and doctors especially when a serious crime has been done.

Or are u saying that he should be held under " medical supervision " before appearing in a court of law for the formal legal process ?


cheers

Locke

 

[lockeliberal]

Dear Dan

The defense. I am seventy, or SHT was an arsehole and thus I am entitled to burn him or to do GBH on him is not a defense full stop. I believe he is guilty and will be found guilty though some of the facts as stated by you might mitigate the sentence after he has been found guilty and not before

I do not believe that the reasons you have stated are an excuse for the crime which has been committed The only reason I will accept for him to be found not guilty is insanity.



Cheers


Locke

 

[Dan Now]

Whether OKC douses petrol on Seng Han Thong or Chiam See Thong or Chee Soon Juan or any Tom Dick Harry, he should not be let off with a light sentence.

We are talking about a human's life for goodness sake.

When that happens, then we talk about it.

Pure conjecture is irrelavent in the courts, I am sure you can agree to that.

But for discussion sake, I am in agreement with you that no one who attacks another man with petrol should walk off scot free. No one in this entire thread is saying that. Why are you repeatedly not registering this ?

But if that man have a track record of mental problems and needs medical supervision there is a real and present mitigating circumstances that cannot be written off just like that.

You got that ?

Dan

 

[tonychat]

Dan, that silver cockster is an self-inflated egoistic , fake acting intelligent wannabe, who try to show that he is one of all the world and the world revolved around him.

He cannot even argue with any sense of intelligence and still wanna be loud over here.

 

[Dan Now]

Dear Dan

The defense. I am seventy, or SHT was an arsehole and thus I am entitled to burn him or to do GBH on him is not a defense full stop. I believe he is guilty and will be found guilty though some of the facts as stated by you might mitigate the sentence after he has been found guilty and not before

I do not believe that the reasons you have stated are an excuse for the crime which has been committed The only reason I will accept for him to be found not guilty is insanity.



Cheers


Locke

Locke ah,

Then why are you chasing your own tail la !

What a waste of time, we are in agreement la. NO ONE, NO ONE, says he did not burn SHT.

Point of my post is simple. That he should be accorded with compassion and leniency. How many times must I repeat that ????

Dan

 

[tonychat]

He is not insane lah. He is perfectly healthy and know that PAP is an ass. An insane person will not know that.

 

[Dan Now]

Dan, that silver cockster is an self-inflated egoistic , fake acting intelligent wannabe, who try to show that he is one of all the world and the world revolved around him.

He cannot even argue with any sense of intelligence and still wanna be loud over here.

Hey Tony,

How have you been ? Hope you are fine and well.

Well, thanks for sounding me out.

Nevertheless, it is my personal believe that Silver deserve to air his piece and hopefully in a discussion, some form of meaningful exchange can mature.

My only worry is that the BIGGER issue about the plight of our homeless, sick and elderly is being sidelined by this discussion itself.

OKC is one of the many homeless destitutes elderly that have been abandon by the many self proclaiming gracious elites.

Even if they insist that OKC be hang one thousand times, the plight of the marginalise homeless will not improve.

Cheers and may you be well and happy

Dan

 

[lockeliberal]

Dear Dan

Accorded compassion and leniency by the court ? So we are in agreement that he should be tried in a court of law then :_)) If so and if we agree that he did burned that arse then since the guilt is a fore gone conclusion , the only question is sentence and mitigation.

However if you are suggesting that the circumstances you have stated should result in him being found not guilty etc etc. Then I strongly disagree with you

I would suggest however that after being found guilty, saying that SHT is an arse and deserved to be burnt would probably not be the best mitigating plea possible. Medical supervision I believe should be left to the courts which will determine his degree or extent of " illness". but that is after he is found guilty ( unless insanity works )



Locke