How to do that if the woman is at senior age, 70+ year old. I can't imagine doing that to a 70+ year old grandma. I pity the husband. Unless the woman look like a 20 year old even though she is 70+.
-
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.
A woman still needs a man
- Thread starter LITTLEREDDOT
- Start date
Women are irrational. There us no way you can tame them.
There are much better ways to set yourself for life as a man. Many many ways, just be creative.
Set yourself to eat soft rice.
LKB’s tonics is the best! Mai Tu Liao!
Be like Jamie Chua. Find a new love.
But Jamie was still young (relatively) and beautiful. Can't say the same for Shi Ka Yee and Jannie Tay.
Same like babi demon puki Very Kind Lady @ginfreely
Woman caused a fire after finding out her husband wanted a divorce
A cigarette that Malisah Mohammad Said had smoked landed on the mattress of the bed and set it alight.PHOTO: PEXELS
Shaffiq Alkhatib
Court Correspondent
AUG 6, 2020
SINGAPORE - A woman, who found out that her husband wanted a divorce, caused a fire in their matrimonial home on the 13th storey of a Bedok North block of flats, resulting in more than $17,000 in damage.
The fire, which started from a lit cigarette, also caused residents of 20 units between the 10th and 14th storeys of the block to evacuate.
No one was injured in the blaze.
Malisah Mohammad Said, 31, was sentenced on Thursday (Aug 6) to five months' jail after admitting to a mischief charge.
Deputy Public Prosecutor Samuel Chew said that the couple had been living separately before the incident due to an argument.
Details about the tiff were not mentioned in court documents.
Malisah was at home at around 12.30pm on July 15 last year when she received a voice message from her husband, telling her that he wanted a divorce.
She replied, saying that she would move out.
She later smoked a cigarette in the master bedroom at around 5pm.
The court heard that pieces of drawing paper belonging to her eight-year-old daughter from her previous marriage were scattered on the bed at the time.
The DPP said: "After the accused was done smoking, she flicked the lit cigarette towards the en-suite bathroom of the master bedroom.
"The accused saw the lit cigarette land on the mattress of the bed. The accused also saw smoke rising from the mattress, and that the lit cigarette was starting to burn the mattress."
Malisah knew that the cigarette could cause a fire to break out.
However, she left the flat without extinguishing it as she wanted to get back at her husband.
About 10 minutes later, police and the Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) received calls from members of the public, alerting them that a fire had broken out in the flat.
SCDF officers were deployed to the scene and Malisah's neighbours had to be evacuated.
The fire was extinguished at around 5.45pm, the court heard. By then, it had already caused $16,820 in damage to the flat.
The fire also damaged an air-conditioning unit of a neighbouring flat and the cost of repairing it was around $300.
For mischief, an offender can be jailed for up to seven years and fined.
Last edited:
Tsk! Tsk! What has the feminist movement got to say about this?
Cara Wong
JAN 15, 2020
A mother, together with a male colleague, turned her two children against their father during divorce proceedings, so much so that their 15-year-old daughter publicly alleged that her father had sexually abused her and her younger brother.
But these allegations were unfounded, and the woman was found to have breached court orders by involving her children in the acrimonious divorce, in which she and her children accused the father of being a "mega-evolved sexual fetishist womanising pervert".
In judgment documents released this week, High Court Judge Debbie Ong said a parent has a responsibility to facilitate a child's relationship with the other parent.
"While children will have their own opinions and make their own decisions especially as they mature, parents cannot disclaim all responsibility for their actions," she said.
Justice Ong, in the grounds for her decision in the case, said the current state of affairs could largely be traced back to the colleague's role in the family.
The colleague had moved into the couple's home after the woman was diagnosed with breast cancer in October 2016, several months after divorce proceedings began in April that year. The woman's colleague claimed to be able to heal her tumours, despite having no medical training, and she paid him $15,000 a month to "remove" them.
The father grew concerned for his son and daughter, aged nine and 15 now, after he learnt of a claim made by the woman in February 2018 that the colleague had performed a "home mastectomy" on her. There were suggestions that the children were present at, or at least aware of, the "surgeries".
The father applied to take over care and control of the children in the interim, which a district judge granted.
The wife appealed against this decision to the High Court.
Justice Ong eventually ruled that the children were to be under her care and control, but reserved harsh words for the mother.
"What was especially troubling was the extent to which the wife and (her colleague) embroiled the children in the conflict," said Justice Ong, noting that the children's affidavits, which were drafted by the colleague, were "greatly disturbing". They "echoed biblical references and phrases" and allegations by the woman and her colleague in their own affidavits.
The children were highly resistant to their father after the appeal, and they went back to their mother a day after they were placed in their father's care in November 2018.
Justice Ong then ordered that they be placed in a home temporarily. The children returned to their mother about a month later and have continued to live with her since.
In June and July last year, the daughter posted the sexual assault allegations on her social media accounts. Along with her brother, they were interviewed by at least one online news outlet with their mother present.
The daughter also made a police report "confessing" that she and her brother were solely responsible for the posts and interview.
But the mother admitted that the police report was an attempt to absolve her from any responsibility, said Justice Ong.
"The wife had relentlessly polarised them against the husband to such an extent that any repair of their relationship with their father was not practically feasible," said Justice Ong.
The mother had informed her children of material in court proceedings and actively allowed her colleague to manipulate the children against their father, she added.
The woman thus breached a court order which prohibited her and the father from involving the children in the litigation.
Justice Ong sentenced the wife to one week's jail for contempt of court. She also issued a final order for the children to be in the mother's care and control, as it was not in their welfare to be isolated from her.
The woman is in ill health and separation is highly distressing for the children, Justice Ong said. The woman was diagnosed with stage four breast cancer in September 2018.
However, the mother should support access of the children to their father, she said. In the light of the mother's ill-health, the children should be able to rely on their father, she added.
The mother, who objected against a fine as she said money was better spent on the children, is appealing against the jail sentence.
Jail for mother who turned kids against father in divorce case
Cara Wong
JAN 15, 2020
A mother, together with a male colleague, turned her two children against their father during divorce proceedings, so much so that their 15-year-old daughter publicly alleged that her father had sexually abused her and her younger brother.
But these allegations were unfounded, and the woman was found to have breached court orders by involving her children in the acrimonious divorce, in which she and her children accused the father of being a "mega-evolved sexual fetishist womanising pervert".
In judgment documents released this week, High Court Judge Debbie Ong said a parent has a responsibility to facilitate a child's relationship with the other parent.
"While children will have their own opinions and make their own decisions especially as they mature, parents cannot disclaim all responsibility for their actions," she said.
Justice Ong, in the grounds for her decision in the case, said the current state of affairs could largely be traced back to the colleague's role in the family.
The colleague had moved into the couple's home after the woman was diagnosed with breast cancer in October 2016, several months after divorce proceedings began in April that year. The woman's colleague claimed to be able to heal her tumours, despite having no medical training, and she paid him $15,000 a month to "remove" them.
The father grew concerned for his son and daughter, aged nine and 15 now, after he learnt of a claim made by the woman in February 2018 that the colleague had performed a "home mastectomy" on her. There were suggestions that the children were present at, or at least aware of, the "surgeries".
The father applied to take over care and control of the children in the interim, which a district judge granted.
The wife appealed against this decision to the High Court.
Justice Ong eventually ruled that the children were to be under her care and control, but reserved harsh words for the mother.
"What was especially troubling was the extent to which the wife and (her colleague) embroiled the children in the conflict," said Justice Ong, noting that the children's affidavits, which were drafted by the colleague, were "greatly disturbing". They "echoed biblical references and phrases" and allegations by the woman and her colleague in their own affidavits.
The children were highly resistant to their father after the appeal, and they went back to their mother a day after they were placed in their father's care in November 2018.
Justice Ong then ordered that they be placed in a home temporarily. The children returned to their mother about a month later and have continued to live with her since.
In June and July last year, the daughter posted the sexual assault allegations on her social media accounts. Along with her brother, they were interviewed by at least one online news outlet with their mother present.
The daughter also made a police report "confessing" that she and her brother were solely responsible for the posts and interview.
But the mother admitted that the police report was an attempt to absolve her from any responsibility, said Justice Ong.
"The wife had relentlessly polarised them against the husband to such an extent that any repair of their relationship with their father was not practically feasible," said Justice Ong.
The mother had informed her children of material in court proceedings and actively allowed her colleague to manipulate the children against their father, she added.
The woman thus breached a court order which prohibited her and the father from involving the children in the litigation.
Justice Ong sentenced the wife to one week's jail for contempt of court. She also issued a final order for the children to be in the mother's care and control, as it was not in their welfare to be isolated from her.
The woman is in ill health and separation is highly distressing for the children, Justice Ong said. The woman was diagnosed with stage four breast cancer in September 2018.
However, the mother should support access of the children to their father, she said. In the light of the mother's ill-health, the children should be able to rely on their father, she added.
The mother, who objected against a fine as she said money was better spent on the children, is appealing against the jail sentence.
That is why I say woman-free life is the best.
She so atas, so must send John Tan lor, since he always claim he is high SES atas.
You still need a woman once in a while even if you got none.
You nameless evil filthy coward Cantonese scammer son of whore go to my Facebook to scam my name a virgin a puki. Pui!
i think you do not accept and understand the term "women-free", which also means not even for "once in a while".
That will be difficult to live with then. But as the saying goes, no money, no honey more or less sums up most divorce cases.
Co-founder of The Hour Glass loses share in Gold Coast home to bankruptcy trustee
The Hour Glass co-founder Jannie Chan in a photo taken in 2019.PHOTO: ST FILE
K.C. Vijayan
Senior Law Correspondent
SEP 6, 2021
SINGAPORE - High-society figure Jannie Chan, the co-founder of luxury watch retailer The Hour Glass, has had her share of a family property on Australia's Gold Coast seized, following a court order in Queensland.
Ms Chan was made a bankrupt in 2019.
Mr Yit Chee Wah, appointed as her private trustee in bankruptcy last year to administer her estate, applied to the Australian court to recognise the Singapore High Court's bankruptcy judgment for enforcement there under cross-border insolvency laws.
The Queensland court's approval means that Mr Yit can administer and sell her share of the property to help pay her creditors.
Justice Roger Derrington, in decision grounds issued last month (August), noted that the administration of the bankrupt's estate "is not greatly advanced" by the move.
"On present indications, the claims of creditors total approximately $50 million and the value of the assets recovered to date is a little over $5 million," said the judge.
It is understood the property in Tay Court, in the Gold Coast suburb Helensvale, was developed some 25 years ago as a family holiday home, among other things.
Ms Chan and her then husband Henry Tay held a 40 per cent share each, while their daughter Sabrina owned 20 per cent.
The couple divorced in 2010 and it is believed that Dr Tay's share in the property was to be transferred to Ms Chan as part of the settlement.
The court found Ms Chan was a foreign bankrupt owning an asset in Australia while her centre of main interest was in Singapore, where she resides in Nassim Road.
The court accepted that apart from the Helensvale land which the trustee seeks to recover and sell, there was nothing to suggest that Ms Chan does business in Australia or lived there for any length of time.
The court also noted she was served with the application and related documents and had replied to the application in June that she had retained a Singapore-based lawyer.
The lawyer, however, later denied having been retained.
"It is appropriate to observe that the bankrupt was served with the current proceedings, and that she has not sought to oppose the making of the orders or adduce evidence which suggests that either her habitual residence or her centre of main interest is other than in Singapore," said the court.
The judge allowed Mr Yit as trustee to claim Ms Chan's share in the property, finding there is "no suggestion that the interests of the bankrupt or of the creditors of her bankrupt estate, including those in Australia or in Singapore, would be adversely effected by the making of the orders sought".
"Further, it appears that there are a number of charges over the property at Tay Court and that, to some degree, prevents the proceeds of the sale of the property from being dispersed until those interests are appropriately considered," added Justice Derrington.
Ms Chan was made a bankrupt in May 2019 following licensed moneylender SME Care's court petition in relation to an overdue $4.15 million debt linked to a 2012 business deal.
To think that she appeared on the cover on many elitist magazines many years ago and won many awards including best businesswoman of the year etc...... 真是风水轮流转，十年河东，十年河西啊！
What kind of fag allows a woman to punch him . Did he cry himself to sleep later?
Some of the men really believe that a man must never hit a woman under all circumstances. Also, a few of them are deeply invested in the 'turn the other cheek' philosophy.
I can bite i can spit. I can fart even. I can call her a fatuglycuntSome of the men really believe that a man must never hit a woman under all circumstances. Also, a few of them are deeply invested in the 'turn the other cheek' philosophy.
Similar threads
