Don't Understand - Please help Explain Legal Terms

[Froggy]

I read with curiosity the ST this morning and do not understand about some legal terms used in the current Ng Boon Gay trial.

Q1 - What is the meaning of "did not get any gratification" in this case? In other words how to quanltify gratification?

Q2 - "Oral sex not completed" - again how to quantify a completed and uncompleted oral sex?

Q3 - "chief never got any gratification from them, there could not be any corruption involved" - this is again very confusing because how to equate a gratified act with corruption ot now not to equate?

 

[Enforcer]

I can only answer number 2. Not completed means Cecilia Sue did not swallow.

 

[Fishypie]

To cut things short, probabLy they meant he did not 'come' or ejacuLate on aLL of the bj ocassions..

 

[ThugSin]

cclia dont allow him to cim so no count?

 

[wikiphile]

Using what Bill Clinton did to siam his own impeachment

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewinsky_scandal

 

[scroobal]

The act does not require any completion - merely soliciting gratification falls within the same act and provides for the same penalties. Gratification covers anything and everything that is not earned. The act is powerful and all encompassing that it is requires the CPIB to seek consent from AGC before an accused can be charged in court in every case for this law. It is why in most cases involving the prevention of corruption act and the gratification is small, it is handled departmentally leading to dismissal as the loss of employment in the civil service is deemed damaging enough.

I found Tan Chee Meng approach to this case very odd. It always makes sense to engage an established criminal lawyer to act such a case. As an ex-CID chief Ng should not know this better than anyone. The Act is very clear. It is the only act that requires a slut, cheat and even the devil to be considered a good person by the court even if they provided the bribe or the gratification.

Not completing oral sex act???????????? What the hell is that? If a was junior lawyer made this claim, he would be chided by the judge.

 

[tonychat]

I read with curiosity the ST this morning and do not understand about some legal terms used in the current Ng Boon Gay trial.

Q1 - What is the meaning of "did not get any gratification" in this case? In other words how to quanltify gratification?

Q2 - "Oral sex not completed" - again how to quantify a completed and uncompleted oral sex?

Q3 - "chief never got any gratification from them, there could not be any corruption involved" - this is again very confusing because how to equate a gratified act with corruption ot now not to equate?

They are trying to cover that PAP-related sinkie ass. There is not rule of law in sinkieland, especially you belong to the correct group.

 

[GoldenDragon]

The act does not require any completion - merely soliciting gratification falls within the same act and provides for the same penalties.

I found Tan Chee Meng approach to this case very odd. It always makes sense to engage an established criminal lawyer to act such a case.

Not completing oral sex act???????????? What the hell is that? If a was junior lawyer made this claim, he would be chided by the judge.

The last point was most shocking to me. And coming from a SC, even harder to swallow. NBG may be regretting his decision now. Don't recall SC TCM being a prolific criminal lawyer.

 

[mojito]

Is the Act so badly drafted that corruption can only be disproved by a technicality?

 

[chonburifc]

Corruption is defined by lee familee. For good running pappies running dog, it's call 'honest mistake', anyone else, it's call korupsion.

Fuck pap.

 

[Froggy]

The act does not require any completion - merely soliciting gratification falls within the same act and provides for the same penalties. Gratification covers anything and everything that is not earned. The act is powerful and all encompassing that it is requires the CPIB to seek consent from AGC before an accused can be charged in court in every case for this law. It is why in most cases involving the prevention of corruption act and the gratification is small, it is handled departmentally leading to dismissal as the loss of employment in the civil service is deemed damaging enough.

I found Tan Chee Meng approach to this case very odd. It always makes sense to engage an established criminal lawyer to act such a case. As an ex-CID chief Ng should not know this better than anyone. The Act is very clear. It is the only act that requires a slut, cheat and even the devil to be considered a good person by the court even if they provided the bribe or the gratification.

Not completing oral sex act???????????? What the hell is that? If a was junior lawyer made this claim, he would be chided by the judge.

The last point was most shocking to me. And coming from a SC, even harder to swallow. NBG may be regretting his decision now. Don't recall SC TCM being a prolific criminal lawyer.

Honestly I am quite surprised to hear the posts above. I have been following this although not in much detail and I kept having an impression that this TCM is doing so well especially discrediting Sue and the prosecution. Looks like I'm wrong.

 

[GoldenDragon]

Honestly I am quite surprised to hear the posts above. I have been following this although not in much detail and I kept having an impression that this TCM is doing so well especially discrediting Sue and the prosecution. Looks like I'm wrong.

No need SC to discredit CS. A new lawyer, with some guidance, would have no difficulties doing that. Even with no legal training, not say I howlian, I would have also been able to discredit CS and the prosecution.

 

[scroobal]

I was stunned. I was actually wondering if he knew what oral sex means. This is worse than Bill Clinton claiming that "I did not have sex with that woman". Twice asking for DATA is considered very rude. Sex was involved on multiple occasions, govt contracts were involved, the parties involved in the sex were key interested parties to those contracts. - all the ingredients are present. Nothing material is missing.

This is nothing to do with side comedy provided by the CPIB.

The last point was most shocking to me. And coming from a SC, even harder to swallow. NBG may be regretting his decision now. Don't recall SC TCM being a prolific criminal lawyer.

 

[scroobal]

Bro, this kind of advocacy is common in jury trial where lay people can be persuaded to move away the actual case and focus on something that is not really relevant. Painting a witness and focusing on a witness is the usual approach.

TCM needs to prove that no sex had occurred and therefore gratification was no involved. Instead everyone is focusing on if the sex was forced or not. The stupid women still enter the car after previous attempts which is unbelievable. If the sex was consensual it is still corruption.

Frankly this case is really weird - the SC is doing things unheard of. And the key prosecution witness is the biggest drama queen in the history of criminal trial and the CPIB running a comedy club.

Honestly I am quite surrised to hear the posts above. I have been following this although not in much detail and I kept having an impression that this TCM is doing so well especially discrediting Sue and the prosecution. Looks like I'm wrong.

 

[GoldenDragon]

Twice asking for DATA is considered very rude.

Not sure if NBG nudged him into this. Even if NBG did, TCM should know better. No way for DATA at this stage. I am 99.99% sure.

 

[scroobal]

Agree with you. I am really curious about TCM. First he was pushing along the lines of an affair and now it is uncompleted sex act and he does not even realise that mere solicitation is sufficient. And then DATA. Maybe he is confused.

The only way that NBG is going to get away is during the defence he explains she grabbed his dick and he pulled away. Or the love affair part. Both gone down the drain if his SC claims that it was not a completed sex act implying that he did not receive gratification.

Not sure if NBG nudged him into this. Even if NBG did, TCM should know better. No way for DATA at this stage. I am 99.99% sure.

 

[Lee5604]

Not sure if NBG nudged him into this. Even if NBG did, TCM should know better. No way for DATA at this stage. I am 99.99% sure.

Bro GD, can you explain what does DATA mean in plain man's language? Thanks.

 

[GoldenDragon]

Bro GD, can you explain what does DATA mean in plain man's language? Thanks.

Discharge Amounting To an Acquittal. Means case buanged. Can also be DNAQ - discharge not amounting to an acquittal.

 

[Unrepented]

If like this also can, then me think those cheongsters whom screwed underage girls can claim the same and appeal against their sentence leow.

I read with curiosity the ST this morning and do not understand about some legal terms used in the current Ng Boon Gay trial.

Q1 - What is the meaning of "did not get any gratification" in this case? In other words how to quanltify gratification?

Q2 - "Oral sex not completed" - again how to quantify a completed and uncompleted oral sex?

Q3 - "chief never got any gratification from them, there could not be any corruption involved" - this is again very confusing because how to equate a gratified act with corruption ot now not to equate?

..........

 

[Lee5604]

Discharge Amounting To an Acquittal. Means case buanged. Can also be DNAQ - discharge not amounting to an acquittal.

Thanks bro GD