- Joined
- Jul 24, 2008
- Messages
- 33,627
- Points
- 0
[h=2]Woffles Wu Case puts to the test “All Equal in the Eyes of the Law”…[/h]
June 20th, 2012 |
Author: Contributions
I’m glad MP Nair [Link] brought up the issues surrounding the sentencing of prominent plastic surgeon Woffles Wu. This has allowed Singaporeans to surface questions they have on their minds about the justice system and has given the AGC a chance to explain their sentencing[Link]. I guess it is one of those things that only a PAP MP can bring up. Imagine what would have happened if Pritram Singh wrote exactly the same thing on his blog, we will be embroiled in some other controversy.
I have been keeping track of the sentences handed out by our courts. There are many cases that I don’t understand if I have to believe that everyone is equal in the eyes of the law – whether you or your father is a CEO or toilet cleaner, you should receive the same punishment if you commit the same crime. This is not what I have been able to observe and for a “non-lawyer” like myself, it has been quite baffling how judges decide on the sentences.
A man who stole from his boss $13,000 and forged documents was fined and not jailed[Link] – he happens to be the son of the CEO of one of Singapore’s biggest companies.
A man who stole $30 to buy food for his handicapped mother was sentenced to 1 year jail[Link].
A law graduate and her boyfriend broke into the store room of a convenience store by cutting a padlock and stole $443 worth of rice, drinks and power extension plugs. The woman was put on probation and her boyfriend who is an engineering student was jailed for one day[Link].
A man was jailed for 2 years for breaking into a convenience store to steal $2[Link]. In 2005, a shoplifter was jailed a whopping 11 years for stealing hairbands and combs [Link]- while she was a repeat offender of petty crimes, this sentence seems extremely harsh.
A undergraduate who got drunk and punched, bit, and head butted policemen was given probation[Link]. Another drunk who punched a cabby but later apologized and gave compensation was jailed for 5 weeks[Link].
Our large income gap means that the poor are stepping into court very disadvantaged because they cannot afford good lawyers. This is one of the effects of the income gap we have to monitor closely. The income inequality has affected the justice system and there is no comprehensive system in place to provide legal aid to ensure there is equal access to legal services for all.
.
Lucky Tan
* Lucky Tan is an avid online blogger since 2005. He likes to study the thoughts of Singapore leaders and the laws of Singapore. He blogs at http://singaporemind.blogspot.com.
I have been keeping track of the sentences handed out by our courts. There are many cases that I don’t understand if I have to believe that everyone is equal in the eyes of the law – whether you or your father is a CEO or toilet cleaner, you should receive the same punishment if you commit the same crime. This is not what I have been able to observe and for a “non-lawyer” like myself, it has been quite baffling how judges decide on the sentences.
A man who stole from his boss $13,000 and forged documents was fined and not jailed[Link] – he happens to be the son of the CEO of one of Singapore’s biggest companies.
A man who stole $30 to buy food for his handicapped mother was sentenced to 1 year jail[Link].
A law graduate and her boyfriend broke into the store room of a convenience store by cutting a padlock and stole $443 worth of rice, drinks and power extension plugs. The woman was put on probation and her boyfriend who is an engineering student was jailed for one day[Link].
A man was jailed for 2 years for breaking into a convenience store to steal $2[Link]. In 2005, a shoplifter was jailed a whopping 11 years for stealing hairbands and combs [Link]- while she was a repeat offender of petty crimes, this sentence seems extremely harsh.
A undergraduate who got drunk and punched, bit, and head butted policemen was given probation[Link]. Another drunk who punched a cabby but later apologized and gave compensation was jailed for 5 weeks[Link].
• “A PERSON’S wealth, status and political leanings have no bearing on whether they are charged with a crime, Singapore’s Attorney-General Walter Woon said yesterday. The country’s top prosecutor said there was only one justice system for all, a comment that followed several high-profile cases involving wealthy Singaporeans that drew criticism from some. Addressing about 270 members of the legal fraternity yesterday, Professor Woon said the prosecution does not consider whether a suspect is ‘rich or politically well-connected’ before pressing charges.” [Link]
• “We see in the recent cases involving former top cops and the underage prostitution case that the prosecutors do go after the rich and powerful (how powerful?). Justice is however has many working parts. It was reported recently that one third of accused have no lawyers” [Link]
• “Going to court without a lawyer can be like stepping into the ring against a trained boxer” – Lim Tanguy. pro-bono lawyer [Link]
In the US, following the acquittal of OJ Simpson for the murder of his wife using a dream team of defense lawyers, there was heated public debate about the US judicial system – how it can remain fair when the quality of lawyers can be very different. The wealthy can afford the best and most experienced lawyers while the poor have to use court appointed lawyers who are sometimes incompetent and unmotivated. This has tilted the scales of justice.• “We see in the recent cases involving former top cops and the underage prostitution case that the prosecutors do go after the rich and powerful (how powerful?). Justice is however has many working parts. It was reported recently that one third of accused have no lawyers” [Link]
• “Going to court without a lawyer can be like stepping into the ring against a trained boxer” – Lim Tanguy. pro-bono lawyer [Link]
“Last year, they defended about 350 poor people for free. But with limited funds and manpower, they can only help selectively. For example, a person with no dependants must earn under $1,300 a month to qualify for Clas. Because of this and other restrictions, the scheme turned away 794 people last year.” [Link]
In a number of cases cited above where the sentencing appears ‘light’, the lawyers prepared lengthy testimonies for the clients for the purpose of mitigation and psychiatrists were hired and found the accused “depressed” or temporarily “unsound” at the time of the crime. So the jobless man jailed for a year with a paralyzed mother to feed wasn’t depressed when he stole the $30?
Our large income gap means that the poor are stepping into court very disadvantaged because they cannot afford good lawyers. This is one of the effects of the income gap we have to monitor closely. The income inequality has affected the justice system and there is no comprehensive system in place to provide legal aid to ensure there is equal access to legal services for all.
.
Lucky Tan
* Lucky Tan is an avid online blogger since 2005. He likes to study the thoughts of Singapore leaders and the laws of Singapore. He blogs at http://singaporemind.blogspot.com.
