$1000 fine for Woffes Wu but 6 weeks jail for Seah Hock Thiam

Thick Face Black Heart

Alfrescian (InfP)
Generous Asset
Joined
Jan 5, 2010
Messages
12,289
Points
113
Read the part in BOLD and tell me where the flawed logic is.

******************************

SINGAPORE: Seah Hock Thiam, who once championed the Yellow Ribbon Project which helps reformed offenders start afresh, was on Tuesday jailed six weeks for abetting his driver to get someone to take the rap for his friends' traffic offences.

Seah, who is the chairman of several companies, including Esun International, is also an ambassador for the Industrial & Services Co-operative Society, one of the agencies that started the Yellow Ribbon Project.

The 45-year-old instigated his driver, Mr Mohamad Azmi Abdul Wahab, in August 2009 to engage two 'scapegoats' -- Salami Badrus and Rosniwati Jumani -- to assume criminal liability for parking offences that were committed by his friends, Mr Ho Ah Huat and Mr Ong Pang Aik.

The offences each carried a S$120 fine and three demerit points.

Mr Ho is the former chief executive officer of Scorpio East Entertainment, while Mr Ong is the chairman and managing director of construction firm Lian Beng Group.

Seah claimed trial in July 2012.

During the trial, Seah's driver, Mohamad Azmi testified that Seah had asked him to "settle" the traffic offences. He said he agreed to help because Seah had been "very supportive" of him as his employer.

Each of the 'scapegoats' was paid about S$300.

In meting out the sentence, the district judge noted features of Seah's case that distinguished itself from the case involving prominent plastic surgeon Woffles Wu Tze Liang.

In June, Wu was ordered to pay the maximum fine of S$1,000 for getting an elderly employee to take the rap for him for a speeding offence. The 52-year-old had abetted Mr Kuan Kit Wah, then 76, to provide false information to the police.

The judge noted that in Wu's case, there was no indication that any monetary rewards had been given by him, whereas in Seah's case, he had paid money to the 'scapegoats'.


Also, Wu had pleaded guilty, whereas Seah, who faced more serious charges, claimed trial.

The judge added: "The offences in this case undermine the points demerit system... A deterrent sentence is called for to deter others from committing the same offence."

However, the judge noted that Seah's contributions to charitable organisations and community work were taken into consideration in sentencing.

Seah's lawyer told the court that he will file an appeal.

He could have been jailed up to seven years and fined for each charge.

-CNA/ac
 
Kangaroo court favours glorified beautician than Ah Beng chairman mah :p
Who did Seah vote for ? :D
 
Seah paid money for the scapegoat's troubles, Wu no pay, but got lighter sentence. I dont understand the logic.. Be more Chow Kuan?
 
Don't forget in Wu's case, the chap is an employee.
Got money, no money, what's the difference?
 
The judge noted that in Wu's case, there was no indication that any monetary rewards had been given by him, whereas in Seah's case, he had paid money to the 'scapegoats'.

So the judge is saying that so long as one does not provide monetary bribe, one can get away lightly with getting someone else to take the blame? So if I abet someone to kill another person without paying any monetary bribe, can I get away practically scot free?

Whether monetary bribe was paid or not should not differentiate the case of WW. The motivation, outcome and impact of offense is the same.

The entire country is now watching AGC to see if AGC will bring WW to court. AGC better get cracking soon if they don't want the hard work of TCH in past few months to go to waste.
 
This is where the Judge had erred and law is now looking like an ass. Someone well pass his retirement age knows that his dependency on his employer is very high. Well said.

Don't forget in Wu's case, the chap is an employee.
Got money, no money, what's the difference?
 
Agree with both points

Whether monetary bribe was paid or not should not differentiate the case of WW. The motivation, outcome and impact of offense is the same.

The entire country is now watching AGC to see if AGC will bring WW to court. AGC better get cracking soon if they don't want the hard work of TCH in past few months to go to waste.
 
Back
Top