- Joined
- Jun 17, 2020
- Messages
- 15,446
- Points
- 113
The problem with oppies is as follows: when they are being sued or charged, they almost never make any clear statement that they are innocent and did not do what they are charged with.
You may think that pleading “not guilty” is the same as declaring innocence. Legally, nobody is allowed a “plea of innocence”, as the Court is not there to prove innocence. However, in public relations, it is not sub judice to claim “innocence” and to say “I did not do what I was charged with.”
That actually saves me a lot of trouble, because I can almost completely write off all the oppies. Almost none of them have ever claimed “innocence” and “that they did not do what was charged.”
Jeyaretnam, for example, never once claimed that he did not do what he was charged with, so the impression I got was: “I did it, but I should not be charged anyway, and charging me for my crimes is actually targeting me.”
When Jeyaretnam did not claim to be innocent and did not say that he did not do what was charged, I wrote him off immediately, as I did not wish to waste time on a criminal who did not even have the basic decency to claim that he was innocent and did not do what was charged.
If they did claim innocence, I would at least consider believing them. But none of them have done so in the last 50 years.
Even in the recent case of Zulikar, he was arrested under the Internal Security Act, and if he had claimed innocence and said that he did not do anything that constituted an offence under the Internal Security Act, I would have been very prepared to consider that he might have been targeted. Instead of claiming that, he simply claims he is being targeted.
Sorry to say, but what is wrong with the government targeting a criminal? As opposed to what — that certain criminals should be immune from prosecution?
Now, coming back to Pritam Singh: did he claim to be innocent? No, he did not. Did he claim not to have done what he is being charged with? No he did not. So I am not going to waste my time on him.
This is not to deviate from my initial opinion. While I am convinced that Pritam Singh is guilty as charged, I also think the AGC is wasting taxpayers’ money by prosecuting over such small affairs.
Yes, the charges are legally brought, and legally adjudicated in Court. However, the question remains: why should there be a charge for this matter at all?
You may think that pleading “not guilty” is the same as declaring innocence. Legally, nobody is allowed a “plea of innocence”, as the Court is not there to prove innocence. However, in public relations, it is not sub judice to claim “innocence” and to say “I did not do what I was charged with.”
That actually saves me a lot of trouble, because I can almost completely write off all the oppies. Almost none of them have ever claimed “innocence” and “that they did not do what was charged.”
Jeyaretnam, for example, never once claimed that he did not do what he was charged with, so the impression I got was: “I did it, but I should not be charged anyway, and charging me for my crimes is actually targeting me.”
When Jeyaretnam did not claim to be innocent and did not say that he did not do what was charged, I wrote him off immediately, as I did not wish to waste time on a criminal who did not even have the basic decency to claim that he was innocent and did not do what was charged.
If they did claim innocence, I would at least consider believing them. But none of them have done so in the last 50 years.
Even in the recent case of Zulikar, he was arrested under the Internal Security Act, and if he had claimed innocence and said that he did not do anything that constituted an offence under the Internal Security Act, I would have been very prepared to consider that he might have been targeted. Instead of claiming that, he simply claims he is being targeted.
Sorry to say, but what is wrong with the government targeting a criminal? As opposed to what — that certain criminals should be immune from prosecution?
Now, coming back to Pritam Singh: did he claim to be innocent? No, he did not. Did he claim not to have done what he is being charged with? No he did not. So I am not going to waste my time on him.
This is not to deviate from my initial opinion. While I am convinced that Pritam Singh is guilty as charged, I also think the AGC is wasting taxpayers’ money by prosecuting over such small affairs.
Yes, the charges are legally brought, and legally adjudicated in Court. However, the question remains: why should there be a charge for this matter at all?
